Rossi vs. IH — New Exhibit Shows Penon/Fabiani Power Usage vs. Utility Data

Thanks to LENR G for pointing out another Exhibit that was entered into the court records yesterday, this time by the Industrial Heat legal team. They entered a document titled “Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion for Leave to File Fourth Amended Answer, Additional Defenses, Counterclaims and Third Party Claims.” (See document 129 here)

It includes a lot of legal arguments, but for the purpose of this post, the most interesting part is Exhibit 1 which is filed along with the document which is a graphical representation of three sets of power data: from Fabio Penon, from Fulvio Fabiani, and from Florida Power and Light during the duration of the E-Cat plant test in Doral. This is what the IH document states about the data.

“Attached as Exhibit A is a chart comparing the power data represented by USQL and Fabiani to the actual power usage shown by FPL, which produced daily records of power usage. These charts show that the power data represented by USQL and Fabiani was false, as alleged in the proposed 4th Amended AACT. See 4th Amended AACT ¶ 142. This is by no means a conclusory allegation. To the contrary, this is a factual allegation supported by direct evidence that Plaintiffs and Third Party Defendants manipulated the results of the purported testing of the Plant at the Doral Location”

The image is below, and can also be accessed here: http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/129-01-Exhibit-1.pdf

129-01 – Exhibit 1

We can see that the lines representing Fabiani and Penon’s data are almost identical. A possible reason that I have thought of for this is that Andrea Rossi stated that he had installed the exact same measurement equipment as Penon in the same locations, and that following the test he said that his data was essentially the same as Penon’s (within the error range of the instruments). Anyway, this is another source of information about the power consumption during the test. IH states that the data proves the Fabiani data was ‘false’, but they don’t explain why they conclude that.

If the Penon and Fabiani traces show the power only consumed by the E-Cat plant, they will not include other power consumption that was going on in the plant during the test, and at this point we don’t know what other electrical equipment was used there, and how much power that equipment consumed. I expect this will be an issue covered during the trial.

  • Pietro F.
    • Industrial Heat LENR work

      continues on about six projects, scattered across multiple continents

  • Pietro F.
    • Industrial Heat LENR work

      continues on about six projects, scattered across multiple continents

      • Frederic Maillard

        Much stunning to me.
        Looks like Tom Darden is shooting in his foot by saying CF works at this stage of the trial with Andrea Rossi !

        • cashmemorz

          What IH does elsewhere has no effect on on the trial. Its only what Ecat as Rossi gave to IH via license is all that is involved. All else is “extrraneous”, if I got my legal jargon right. In the large picture, to us in the peanut gallery, we might see it as incongruous, re the legal fight and the point it is fought on, yes, there is something fishy looking.

  • Gerard McEk

    I agree LENR G. The power consumption at the utility meter should be higher than that of the plant, unless both were measuring at the same measuring point. Otherwise lighting, hall ventilation, heating, etc. should show higher energy usage on the utility meter.

    • Jamie Sibley

      The green FLP line being below the red/blue could be explained by the way the data is collected from the smart meter. The frequency of variation in the green line virtually guarantees that it was a smart meter and not a daily reading by a human. The problem with smart meters is how the local utility reports data when the transmission are not received. My local utility uses smart meters, and when I review the hourly data, most days have a 10-15% loss of usage reports. If IH used the hourly data, or any other raw feed from FLP and did not correctly fill in the gaps due to transmission interference, it is likely that for a period of time in November, there was rf interference and a higher than normal packet loss from the smart meter. The monthly power bills would not be affected by this interference, because they use a cumulative counter data from the meter. Unless IH can show that the green line was generated by daily recordings from the face of the FLP power meter, it is not reliable data.

  • Gerard McEk

    I agree LENR G. The power consumption at the utility meter should be higher than that of the plant, unless both were measuring at the same measuring point. Otherwise lighting, hall ventilation, heating, etc. should show higher energy usage on the utility meter.

    • Jamie Sibley

      The green FLP line being below the red/blue could be explained by the way the data is collected from the smart meter. The frequency of variation in the green line virtually guarantees that it was a smart meter and not a daily reading by a human. The problem with smart meters is how the local utility reports data when the transmission are not received. My local utility uses smart meters, and when I review the hourly data, most days have a 10-15% loss of usage reports. If IH used the hourly data, or any other raw feed from FLP and did not correctly fill in the gaps due to transmission interference, it is likely that for a period of time in November, there was rf interference and a higher than normal packet loss from the smart meter. The monthly power bills would not be affected by this interference, because they use a cumulative counter data from the meter. Unless IH can show that the green line was generated by daily recordings from the face of the FLP power meter, it is not reliable data.

  • Curbina

    IH implies tha Fabiani’s and Penon data is wrong, but even if IH is right, the cumulative difference is 33% off, so the COP would still be (asuming the output of the e-cat was still 1 MW) high.

    • I don’t think the green FPL line being higher is seen as a significant problem; some additional power use by the facility in addition to the plant is expected. Fans, lights, pumps, computers, air conditioning in the office area, etc. etc.

      I think they’re calling out when the green line drops below the red and blue lines. That should not happen and requires an explanation.

      Note that the two lines correlate fairly well for most of the year adding some degree of confidence.

      Were there measurement errors in late November? How accurate is the FPL data? Where is the raw data so we can double check it?

      In short, it looks like real data from a real experiment, complete with the one section of inexplicable data which always seems to accompany any data set. (And not a mistake that a master magician fraudster would likely make if he was just conjuring data out of thin air.)

      • Gerald

        Last 2 weeks of november they did the test everyone asked for, using de heat to generate power and feed it back and forgotten they measured input. 😉 This is a joke offcourse.
        But yes this needs a good explanation indeed.

        • You joke, but along those lines plugging in a generator, say to cover for a downtime Tiger, would be one possible explanation.

          • Gerald

            Yes, that was the first thing that came to mind also. It is not per definition false data but the explanation has to be real good with evidence from Rossi I guess. Lets wait, more will come out now a trial gets near.

  • Curbina

    IH implies tha Fabiani’s and Penon data is wrong, but even if IH is right, the cumulative difference is 33% off, so the COP would still be (asuming the output of the e-cat was still 1 MW) high.

    • I don’t think the green FPL line being higher is seen as a significant problem; some additional power use by the facility in addition to the plant is expected. Fans, lights, pumps, computers, air conditioning in the office area, etc. etc.

      I think they’re calling out when the green line drops below the red and blue lines. That should not happen and requires an explanation.

      Note that the two lines correlate fairly well for most of the year adding some degree of confidence.

      Were there measurement errors in late November? How accurate is the FPL data? Where is the raw data so we can double check it?

      In short, it looks like real data from a real experiment, complete with the one section of inexplicable data which always seems to accompany any data set. (And not a mistake that a master magician fraudster would likely make if he was just conjuring data out of thin air.)

      • Gerald

        Last 2 weeks of november they did the test everyone asked for, using de heat to generate power and feed it back and forgotten they measured input. 😉 This is a joke offcourse.
        But yes this needs a good explanation indeed.

        • You joke, but along those lines plugging in a generator, say to cover for a downtime Tiger, would be one possible explanation.

          • Gerald

            Yes, that was the first thing that came to mind also. It is not per definition false data but the explanation has to be real good with evidence from Rossi I guess. Lets wait, more will come out now a trial gets near.

  • wizkid

    So then, IH is thinking that the Judge is too stupid to understand graphs, and see that the output of Rossi’s device is removed and ignored. The only other conclusion I see would be that IH doesn’t understand the graphs, and that just changes the trial from an atrocity to a tragic comedy. Yes, the glitch needs to be explained, but like noted, it denotes the reality of the experimental method. Damages go up proportionally to the drop in the IH IQ.

    • Gerald

      Just a question. Do you know how they measure the power usage in Florida? I see they have smart meters which transfers data wireless so you can see usage online in hours/days/month. But when I look at 128-02-ehibit-2 the electric bill the paydates are always on a week(work) day. Is this because it a handjob to start making bills or are the powermeasurements done by hand? If you average and divide the bills with the days measured the only thing that stands out is okt-15 low usage and nov-15 high usage. avg a day.

      days KWH avg/day
      jul-15 30 10837 361
      aug-15 33 11438 347
      sep-15 29 7831 270
      okt-15 30 7252 242
      nov-15 32 12587 393
      dec-15 29 8502 293
      jan-16 34 10126 298
      feb-16 28 9396 336
      mrt-16 29 6154 212

      Not knowing anything I would say, the end of okt measurement maybe to low or november is expensive month in Florida. but then again the IH graph shows there is daily data.
      I want say anything with this, not blame IH or defend Rossi or visa versa, I just wondered how this proces goes in America,

      • Ged

        We are billed by the month here, and the bill is sent on a weekday, which is where the date comes from for the monthly charging.

        • Gerald

          Ok, thats somewhat else then in my country. The homes pay on a predicted year usage and the payments are equal every month. At the end of the year, calculated from first use thing get in line based on the actual usage. In my work its different, there is a bill every month based on usage, but often our own measurments are different from the electric company. It’s all in the moment of “writting” down the numbers. Over a year no problem, but we use a lot of power and so the payments internal are a forcast based on the exact internal measurement. and often payment have to be compasated because the of the time when the number are taken. And a day doesn’t seem much, but its 3%. So in a bad case 6-8% is not weird. Because of the big numbers those % raise questions at the financial department. In the end its no problem and explainable but at first not knowing the how it works people make assumptions. Often wrong, let the data speak. Wise group said.. 😉

          • Gerald

            You know, numbers are just numbers. At first as an it guy coming in contact years ago with technical guys and power measurement I thought: “come on its simple”. But I have seen fireware erros, user mistakes, numbers that first din’t seem right and learned that is not all the time simple and learned more to trust the human insight like engineer48.Those guys live the numbers. Like Mats said above I’m not impressed. The glitch need explanation if the data is right.

  • wizkid

    So then, IH is thinking that the Judge is too stupid to understand graphs, and see that the output of Rossi’s device is removed and ignored. The only other conclusion I see would be that IH doesn’t understand the graphs, and that just changes the trial from an atrocity to a tragic comedy. Yes, the glitch needs to be explained, but like noted, it denotes the reality of the experimental method. Damages go up proportionally to the drop in the IH IQ.

    • Gerald

      Just a question. Do you know how they measure the power usage in Florida? I see they have smart meters which transfers data wireless so you can see usage online in hours/days/month. But when I look at 128-02-ehibit-2 the electric bill the paydates are always on a week(work) day. Is this because it a handjob to start making bills or are the powermeasurements done by hand? If you average and divide the bills with the days measured the only thing that stands out is okt-15 low usage and nov-15 high usage. avg a day.

      days KWH avg/day
      jul-15 30 10837 361
      aug-15 33 11438 347
      sep-15 29 7831 270
      okt-15 30 7252 242
      nov-15 32 12587 393
      dec-15 29 8502 293
      jan-16 34 10126 298
      feb-16 28 9396 336
      mrt-16 29 6154 212

      Not knowing anything I would say, the end of okt measurement maybe to low or november is expensive month in Florida. but then again the IH graph shows there is daily data.
      I want say anything with this, not blame IH or defend Rossi or visa versa, I just wondered how this proces goes in America,

      • Ged

        We are billed by the month here, and the bill is sent on a weekday, which is where the date comes from for the monthly charging.

        • Gerald

          Ok, thats somewhat else then in my country. The homes pay on a predicted year usage and the payments are equal every month. At the end of the year, calculated from first use thing get in line based on the actual usage. In my work its different, there is a bill every month based on usage, but often our own measurments are different from the electric company. It’s all in the moment of “writting” down the numbers. Over a year no problem, but we use a lot of power and so the payments internal are a forcast based on the exact internal measurement. and often payment have to be compasated because the of the time when the number are taken. And a day doesn’t seem much, but its 3%. So in a bad case 6-8% is not weird. Because of the big numbers those % raise questions at the financial department. In the end its no problem and explainable but at first not knowing the how it works people make assumptions. Often wrong, let the data speak. Wise group said.. 😉

          • Gerald

            You know, numbers are just numbers. At first as an it guy coming in contact years ago with technical guys and power measurement I thought: “come on its simple”. But I have seen fireware erros, user mistakes, numbers that first din’t seem right and learned that is not all the time simple and learned more to trust the human insight like engineer48.Those guys live the numbers. Like Mats said above I’m not impressed. The glitch need explanation if the data is right.

  • guest1

    Can someone explain what we are seeing here?

    • Mike

      If the graph shows measured electricity input to the e-cat there is a few things to observe. The green curve indicates that the e-cat was continously operating during the entire test and that the input varied between 75 % and 100 % of full load. The red/blue lines indicate that there were two stops during the test, in the beginning of April 2015 and the beginning of January 2016. Does it fit with what Rossi has reported regarding the operation?

  • Jonnyb

    Looks like the Red line has a bit of Integration (Averaging) on it where as the Blue and the Green line have much less. Very early on it can be seen that the Red line is lagging a bit behind the Blue line. I recon it is just how they have set up the readings, different instruments or different configurations, maybe changes throughout the year, it was a very long test.

    • Mike

      it can be different sampling rates…….or something else

      • Jonnyb

        Yeah, exactly, also they may have adjusted parameters on the measuring devices/data loggers. Also if they had access to each others measurements they may have made slight adjustments to ensure all their reading were correct.

  • Jonnyb

    Looks like the Red line has a bit of Integration (Averaging) on it where as the Blue and the Green line have much less. Very early on it can be seen that the Red line is lagging a bit behind the Blue line. I recon it is just how they have set up the readings, different instruments or different configurations, maybe changes throughout the year, it was a very long test.

    • Mike

      it can be different sampling rates…….or something else

      • Jonnyb

        Yeah, exactly, also they may have adjusted parameters on the measuring devices/data loggers. Also if they had access to each others measurements they may have made slight adjustments to ensure all their reading were correct.

  • Engineer48

    What I see in the Green Line is a weekly cyclic load that is fairly constant for 5 or 6 days and then reduces for 1 to 2 days, aligned with weekends. Also see a end of month power consumption alteration event due to maybe JMP plant monthly maintenance or plant adjustment?

    Also note that at the start, there is little evidence of the weekly cyclic power usage but the pattern is clearly seen to develop as time runs on. Which is to be expected as the JMP plant is probably being bedded down into a weekly routine.

    This suggests there is something more than a heat exchanger and fan on the other side of the JMP wall as that would not cause the cyclic power usage.

    Do note that IH have not provided the detailed digital FLP metering data to back up their Green Line so the validity of the IH Green Line is yet to be proved to be an accurate representation of the FLP detailed metering data.

    • artefact

      welcome back 🙂

      • wpj

        Seconded

        • Engineer48

          Hi WPJ,

          Not really back.

          As I work in the distribution industry, looking at load metering data is 2nd nature. You guys also need to look at the max demand kW data in the FLP account as that shows the max demand kWs the load drew, even if for 1 cycle. Utilities charge for both kWh consumed and for the max demand load, which normally occurs as very heavy inductive loads, motors, start up.

          What I see from looking at all the data, is a real dynamic load that it not the constant load of the ECat heaters and pumps.

          I suspect IH do not understanding the gold mine of load characterists data they provided.

          For me it totally destroys the heat exchanger and fan proposal as to what is inside the JMP enclosure.

          Sorry IH but your data disclosure shows there is a dynamic load, other than the 1MW ECat plant, present at the site.

          • psi2u2

            Engineer48,

            As others have said, welcome “back” or thanks for speaking up – you may not realize how valued your actual experience in working with these kinds of systems professionally really is here. Not to mention that you can communicate your technical expertise in such lucid explanations. You obviously have a strong ethos in this community for those reasons, and your clear willingness to interpret Rossi’s findings without prejudgments means a lot to those of us who don’t have your technical background, and are still hoping, but with less knowledge than you bring to the question, that Rossi has what he says he has.

            When I last read some of your posts you were planning on moving forward with your own LENR project. May I ask if you have done so, and if so do you have any report for us?

          • Engineer48

            Hi Psi2u2,

            Life is what happens to such plans.

            Very busy with a big project at present. When finished, then time to relook at the LENR project.

          • wpj

            Good to have your input again from someone who actually knows what they are talking about rather than speculating (like most of us!).

          • Gerard McEk

            Hi Engineer48, welcome back.
            As you say this is a goldmine. If this data indeed provides some information of the JMP side, then it makes me more curious what proces was used to use this 1MW of ‘continuous’ power. There is still a possibility that it went into the drain with public water.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            “There is still a possibility that it went into the drain with public water.”

            That would have been very expensive and probably illegal since the water was hot. Anyway, the bills from the supplier could help to clarify this if necessary.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Correction: About 36 m^3 per day would not have been that expensive… But the reported inlet temperatures seem to indicate in itself that most of the water has been recycled.

          • Gerard McEk

            That is right about 70C return water. A heat exchanger can do the job, I thought you meant with ‘expensive’ that AR just wastes the energy and got nothing in return.

          • US_Citizen71

            You almost always recycle the steam/water in a boiler setup due to the need for the water to be essentially distilled to prevent corrosion and mineral build up in the boiler. I do not think the 1MW plant would be any different that any other boiler in that respect.

    • sam

      Hi Eng 48 one of the lost have
      been found.
      Do you know where give a dog a
      bone, Ged,Hank,Chapman and
      the other members of the A
      team are.

  • Engineer48

    What I see in the Green Line is a weekly cyclic load that is fairly constant for 5 or 6 days and then reduces for 1 to 2 days, aligned with weekends. Also see a end of month power consumption alteration event due to maybe JMP plant monthly maintenance or plant adjustment?

    Also note that at the start, there is little evidence of the weekly cyclic power usage but the pattern is clearly seen to develop as time runs on. Which is to be expected as the JMP plant is probably being bedded down into a weekly routine.

    This suggests there is something more than a heat exchanger and fan on the other side of the JMP wall as that would not cause the cyclic power usage.

    Do note that IH have not provided the detailed digital FLP metering data to back up their Green Line so the validity of the IH Green Line is yet to be proved to be an accurate representation of the FLP detailed metering data.

    • artefact

      welcome back 🙂

      • wpj

        Seconded

        • Engineer48

          Hi WPJ,

          Not really back.

          As I work in the distribution industry, looking at load metering data is 2nd nature. You guys also need to look at the max demand kW data in the FLP account as that shows the max demand kWs the load drew, even if for 1 cycle. Utilities charge for both kWh consumed and for the max demand load, which normally occurs as very heavy inductive loads, motors, start up.

          What I see from looking at all the data, is a real dynamic load that it not the constant load of the ECat heaters and pumps.

          I suspect IH do not understanding the gold mine of load characterists data they provided.

          For me it totally destroys the heat exchanger and fan proposal as to what is inside the JMP enclosure.

          Sorry IH but your data disclosure shows there is a dynamic load, other than the 1MW ECat plant, present at the site.

          • psi2u2

            Engineer48,

            As others have said, welcome “back” or thanks for speaking up – you may not realize how valued your actual experience in working with these kinds of systems professionally really is here. Not to mention that you can communicate your technical expertise in such lucid explanations. You obviously have a strong ethos in this community for those reasons, and your clear willingness to interpret Rossi’s findings without prejudgments means a lot to those of us who don’t have your technical background, and are still hoping, but with less knowledge than you bring to the question, that Rossi has what he says he has.

            When I last read some of your posts you were planning on moving forward with your own LENR project. May I ask if you have done so, and if so do you have any report for us?

          • Engineer48

            Hi Psi2u2,

            Life is what happens to such plans.

            Very busy with a big project at present. When finished, then time to relook at the LENR project.

          • wpj

            Good to have your input again from someone who actually knows what they are talking about rather than speculating (like most of us!).

          • Gerard McEk

            Hi Engineer48, welcome back.
            As you say this is a goldmine. If this data indeed provides some information of the JMP side, then it makes me more curious what proces was used to use this 1MW of ‘continuous’ power. There is still a possibility that it went into the drain with public water.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            “There is still a possibility that it went into the drain with public water.”

            That would have been very expensive and probably illegal since the water was hot. Anyway, the bills from the supplier could help to clarify this if necessary.

          • Andreas Moraitis

            Correction: About 36 m^3 per day would not have been that expensive… But the reported inlet temperatures seem to indicate in itself that most of the water has been recycled.

          • Gerard McEk

            That is right about 70C return water. A heat exchanger can do the job, I thought you meant with ‘expensive’ that AR just wastes the energy and got nothing in return.

          • US_Citizen71

            You almost always recycle the steam/water in a boiler setup due to the need for the water to be essentially distilled to prevent corrosion and mineral build up in the boiler. I do not think the 1MW plant would be any different that any other boiler in that respect.

    • sam

      Hi Eng 48 one of the lost have
      been found.
      Do you know where give a dog a
      bone, Ged,Hank,Chapman and
      the other missing members of the A
      team are.

  • Not impressed…

    • we-cat

      Hi Mats,

      With the evidence or with Rossi?

      Cheers,

      JB

      • The evidence!

        • wpj

          There is a nice overlay on the LENR Forum (if you can summon up the courage to go there) by Paradigmnoia (know as “Obvious” on this forum) which puts all the parameters together.

          https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4745-rossi-vs-darden-developments-part-2/?pageNo=37

          • Been there. Didn’t add much.
            I have not visited LENR Forum frequently lately, but I did in the last few days. I find the speculations based on the small subset of the the documents from the lawsuit being released publicly fairly boring, especially when I note that after several months the discussions at LENR Forum (regarding the lawsuit) are essentially still the same—allegations based on weak and constantly varying ‘information.’
            LENR Forum is not the court, and the participants do not have access to the complete set of evidence from both parties. Actually no-one has (me neither of course). They will be presented in court in June. Until then, all speculations are doomed to be skewed.
            However, the ‘evidence’ released publicly so far, particularly from IH, is not impressive. I expect better stuff.
            On the other hand, people here at E-Cat News often do a god job trying to make sense of those crumbles.

          • wpj

            Apart from it being E-Catworld, that last line will have DW foaming at the mouth.

          • Sorry (Frank)!
            Now edited.
            Let him foam BTW 🙂

          • wpj

            Seems to be his natural state from the vitriol that he spews out.

          • sam

            Does anyone have an opinion on this comment from ego out blog about the excess heat.Thanks

            Simon DerricuttFebruary 4, 2017 at 4:50 AM
            Peter – the value to mankind of a workable LENR solution is probably so great as to be incalculable. This is why I spend my time in research into power production. Once we can get very cheap power without having some sort of pollution as a by-product then we can produce food (indoor farming), water (condensation from air) and shelter (heated or cooled as necessary) anywhere on the world, and we can also recycle all materials rather than jettisoning them (more pollution) since the recycling costs too much in power requirements.

            You say “In NiH it seems only Rossi has MULTIPLICATIVE excess heat” and this is true, but of course I would stress the “seems” in that sentence since I still see no evidence-trail of the heat that was said to be produced. My background is in Failure Analysis – a fascinating job and I was good at it. The process requires examining all assumptions, including those that are normally hidden since “everyone knows that”. You may have noticed that I have stated that we can’t discount the possibility that Rossi saw SOME gain in the Doral test that was below the threshold of what evidence we have. However, losing 1MW of heat 24/7 for around a year is not possible – it would have been obvious where it went.

            Like most practical engineers where a lot of money can depend on getting the right answer, I’ll use several alternative methods of measurement on things that are critical, so that there is no single-point of failure. Whereas a thermocouple can give you an indication of temperature to a precision of 0.1°C very easily, there may well be errors from EMI or induction that are a lot more than the precision, so a liquid-in-glass stick thermometer gives you something to compare against that is not affected by EMI and so tells the truth, but is less precise.

            You can put forward the defence that Rossi is not a scientist but an entrepreneur, but on a practical basis the claimed results do not have the corroborative evidence that would make them acceptable. Instead, I am told that the absence of that evidence (where did the 1MW go?) will be explained later. Jed says that IH did an IR survey of the site – that 1MW should have been easily visible. It wasn’t. My prediction is that it will never be satisfactorily explained, as such an amount of heat would be noticeable without instrumentation. It will remain the elephant in the room, ignored by those who believe Rossi has the LENR+ he claims.

            I first became aware of Rossi in 2011, where he demonstrated a 1MW reactor and claimed success at around 500kW even though a 500kW Diesel generator was running the whole time. Did that reactor produce excess heat, or did it not do so? If it worked, then for the last 5 years or so we could have had a Rossi reactor working somewhere useful. Did the Lugano experiment produce excess power? If so, then for the last couple of years or so we could have had that running somewhere and people would have bought them – after all that was high-grade heat suitable for high-pressure steam turbines. There are a lot of Rossi reactors around, considering there were several (and two designs) at the Doral test. Where are they actually in use?

            If Rossi’s systems worked as claimed, then we have to assume that Rossi doesn’t care about the poor children in the world and just wants to extract the maximum amount of money. We also have to assume that the automated factories set up to mass-manufacture them are still mothballed and waiting for the “go” command. Considering the purchase cost of automation and the site costs, that’s going to be eating a lot of money just waiting, since it will also need security systems to avoid vandalism or industrial espionage.

            The evidence just doesn’t add up to the conclusion that Rossi can be telling the truth. Since you are an inventive industrial engineer, I’m surprised that you accept the holes in the story.

            Reply

          • US_Citizen71

            In my opinion this person’s background is more likely law, public relations or advertising he does not write like an engineer. His allegations are more ad hominem than technical. He has swallowed Jed’s claim that the <110C heat created by the 1MW plant should have melted the building and anything near it. Bottom line lots of hot air very few facts and content to his comment.

          • hhiram

            Fair points, but the concerns about Rossi holding on to life-saving tech for too long are also valid. At some point it is simply inhumane and unethical for him to withhold his technology instead of open-sourcing everything through MFMP. He already has $10 million. He is not needed to change the world now, he could GIVE everything to Elon Musk and he would still be rich and famous and a world hero for all time.

            Instead, he is now playing like either 1) a control freak, 2) a greedy person who wants to be a billionaire instead of a millionaire, 3) a narcissist who wants more fame than he will already get if he simply gives the secrets away, or 4) simply a fraud who has been lying the whole time.

            Remember his age. He could die at any moment and take all his secrets with him.

            When is it no longer ethical for him NOT to open-source everything?

          • Andreas Moraitis

            1) Yes.
            2) I don’t think so. Except if you consider entrepreneurs in general as „greedy“.
            3) Not more than many other persons.
            4) Makes not much sense to me (there are more convenient ways to commit fraud).

          • US_Citizen71

            He is acting just like any other businessman. Has Apple, Polaroid, Motorola, GE, etc., etc. opened sourced all of their technologies? Why not? Wouldn’t the world be a better place? Why don’t we just take their patents away to make it a better world? Why because it would take away all incentive to innovate! Communism might seem like a great idea but it works horribly in reality!

            “Remember his age. He could die at any moment and take all his secrets with him.” – He has stated many times that the knowledge is safe and can be accessed if he dies.

          • hhiram

            That’s apples to oranges.

            A better comparison would be if some individual inventor was sitting on a cure to cancer or AIDS or malaria.

            And we already have heated ethical debates about pharmaceutical companies that make specific drugs hugely expensive, so just imagine the difference if one person were holding out for more money at the expense of millions of lives each year. We would rightly condemn that person as a monster.

            The only reason why this isn’t already a pressing ethical issue with huge pressure for governments to exercise eminent domain over the technology is that almost nobody takes the technology seriously.

          • DNI

            I agree with you that there haven’t been any impressive evidence from IH that the plant didn’t work. I think exhibit 5 come closest. I think those are valid questions and I think IH where entitled to have those answered before paying. But I haven’t seen any good evidence from Rossi either. The only thing we have is the test rapport. But we know very little about who made it and how the measurements where taken.

            So everything comes down to who to trust.

          • Obvious

            Below is the clearer version of the overlay.
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b57c1d920e3504c5c5d7856dc1181b48b19b9bcdf202dc301db0a4bb3150cc0a.jpg Notes:

            For the FLP-Penon-Fabiani part, I simply cut the plot from the
            background right from the IH Exhibit, and pasted it directly onto my
            graph. I stretched it just enough to line up the ends with the beginning
            and end date range, and a stretched it a little up-down to make it not
            crash into my graph lines as best possible. The blue reference lines
            were added for clarity, directly over the original lines.

            COP max includes all water, heated, boiled, and steam heated. (Not just boiled per the listed COP).

            I could get rid of the MWd (X 10000) line. It was just to see where
            the reactors were all running or some offline, compared to other data.
            Note that it used all the steam and water heating also, and it even dips
            to 0.69 MWd for a significant period near the end of the test.

            Presumably, if I plot power in, it should match the Penon-Fabiani
            line (I’ll test that). Note there that Fabiani’s line seems to be a day
            ahead of Penon’s power for the first month or so. (Much easier to see in
            the original Exhibit).

        • we-cat

          Sir,

          Indeed, i hoped you would answer that! Good to see you are somewhat more involved lately. What a ride..

          JB

    • Engineer48

      Hey Mats,

      How is it with you?

      From my prospective, the IH delivered Green Line is very interesting and clearly shows a weekly cyclic energy usage with some event that happens at the end of each month.

      There is in my opinion, also some bad data in that Green line such as the spike and dip in mid May. Understand the data is daily kWh usage. That spike and dip says that one day the usage was normal, then the next day was 50% higher, then the next day was back to normal, then the next day was 50% lower and then the next day was back to normal. Spikes like that do not happen. Next look at the end of month to start of month large scale consumption changes. Something is going on with the load or with the metering system doing a reset or some such event. Says to me the metering data is suspect.

      IH need to provide the raw metering data they received from FLP before any firm conclusions can be drawn. As to the lower Green line in late Nov 2015, there are several explanations, which include a meter data error. Unless the site had TOU (Time of Use) load pricing, which from the account it does not, then the utility only invoices on the accumulative monthly kWh and kWD usage. I doubt they correlated the detailed metering data to the accumulative monthy kWh data. Have seen a LOT of examples where the detailed metering data does not match the billing data. So don’t read too much into the Green line dip in late Nov 2015.

      This is not the load profile of a fan driving a heat exchanger in the JMP enclosure.

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/51849baba2130a353da6a5d0c051ebad69ab75f6e4c567982353bbe7085a2bb2.png

      • Omega Z

        How do the numbers correlate with when 1 of the 4 reactors is down for repair?

        • Engineer48

          Hi Omega Z,

          Believe the 4 Tigers are the pre heaters that bring the water temp up to just about boiling. Additionally from the sight glasses, it appears the lower Tiger does not operate normally and sits as backup to the 3 operational Tigers. As the Tigers are controlled from the central computer, if an operational Tiger goes down, simple to increase the heater duty cycle in the other 2, until the backup can be brought on line. With a good control system, there should be little variation in energy consumption.

          Then the almost boiling water is deliver to a holding tank between the lower pressure pre heat Tiger’s and the Blue Cat boilers that feed the smaller and higher pressure Blue Cats that produce the superheated steam. Believe there are several spare Blue Cat reactors as well.

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            Hello Engineer48. Long time i dont see you here. How is your project doing?

      • Hi Eng48—everything fine thanks. Relevant comments.

  • Not impressed…

    • we-cat

      Hi Mats,

      With the evidence or with Rossi?

      Cheers,

      JB

      • The evidence!

        • wpj

          There is a nice overlay on the LENR Forum (if you can summon up the courage to go there) by Paradigmnoia (know as “Obvious” on this forum) which puts all the parameters together.

          https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4745-rossi-vs-darden-developments-part-2/?pageNo=37

          • Been there. Didn’t add much.
            I have not visited LENR Forum frequently lately, but I did in the last few days. I find the speculations based on the small subset of the the documents from the lawsuit being released publicly fairly boring, especially when I note that after several months the discussions at LENR Forum (regarding the lawsuit) are essentially still the same—allegations based on weak and constantly varying ‘information.’
            LENR Forum is not the court, and the participants do not have access to the complete set of evidence from both parties. Actually no-one has (me neither of course). They will be presented in court in June. Until then, all speculations are doomed to be skewed.
            However, the ‘evidence’ released publicly so far, particularly from IH, is not impressive. I expect better stuff.
            On the other hand, people here at E-CatWorld often do a god job trying to make sense of those crumbles.

          • wpj

            Apart from it being E-Catworld, that last line will have DW foaming at the mouth.

          • Sorry (Frank)!
            Now edited.
            Let him foam BTW 🙂

          • wpj

            Seems to be his natural state from the vitriol that he spews out.

          • Facepalm

            Hi Mats, have you visited energikatalysatorn.se latley? Any comments to the latest comments?

          • DNI

            I agree with you that there haven’t been any impressive evidence from IH that the plant didn’t work. I think exhibit 5 come closest. I think those are valid questions and I think IH where entitled to have those answered before paying. But I haven’t seen any good evidence from Rossi either. The only thing we have is the test rapport. But we know very little about who made it and how the measurements where taken.

            So everything comes down to who to trust.

          • Obvious

            Below is the clearer version of the overlay.
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b57c1d920e3504c5c5d7856dc1181b48b19b9bcdf202dc301db0a4bb3150cc0a.jpg Notes:

            For the FLP-Penon-Fabiani part, I simply cut the plot from the
            background right from the IH Exhibit, and pasted it directly onto my
            graph. I stretched it just enough to line up the ends with the beginning
            and end date range, and a stretched it a little up-down to make it not
            crash into my graph lines as best possible. The blue reference lines
            were added for clarity, directly over the original lines.

            COP max includes all water, heated, boiled, and steam heated. (Not just boiled per the listed COP).

            I could get rid of the MWd (X 10000) line. It was just to see where
            the reactors were all running or some offline, compared to other data.
            Note that it used all the steam and water heating also, and it even dips
            to 0.69 MWd for a significant period near the end of the test.

            Presumably, if I plot power in, it should match the Penon-Fabiani
            line (I’ll test that). Note there that Fabiani’s line seems to be a day
            ahead of Penon’s power for the first month or so. (Much easier to see in
            the original Exhibit).

        • we-cat

          Sir,

          Indeed, i hoped you would answer that! Good to see you are somewhat more involved lately. What a ride..

          JB

    • Engineer48

      Hey Mats,

      How is it with you?

      From my prospective, the IH delivered Green Line is very interesting and clearly shows a weekly cyclic energy usage with some event that happens at the end of each month.

      There is in my opinion, also some bad data in that Green line such as the spike and dip in mid May. Understand the data is daily kWh usage. That spike and dip says that one day the usage was normal, then the next day was 50% higher, then the next day was back to normal, then the next day was 50% lower and then the next day was back to normal. Spikes like that do not happen. Next look at the end of month to start of month large scale consumption changes. Something is going on with the load or with the metering system doing a reset or some such event. Says to me the metering data is suspect.

      IH need to provide the raw metering data they received from FLP before any firm conclusions can be drawn. As to the lower Green line in late Nov 2015, there are several explanations, which include a meter data error. Unless the site had TOU (Time of Use) load pricing, which from the account it does not, then the utility only invoices on the accumulative monthly kWh and kWD usage. I doubt they correlated the detailed metering data to the accumulative monthy kWh data. Have seen a LOT of examples where the detailed metering data does not match the billing data. So don’t read too much into the Green line dip in late Nov 2015.

      This is not the load profile of a fan driving a heat exchanger in the JMP enclosure.

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/51849baba2130a353da6a5d0c051ebad69ab75f6e4c567982353bbe7085a2bb2.png

      • Omega Z

        How do the numbers correlate with when 1 of the 4 reactors is down for repair?

        • Engineer48

          Hi Omega Z,

          Believe the 4 Tigers are the pre heaters that bring the water temp up to just about boiling. Additionally from the sight glasses, it appears the lower Tiger does not operate normally and sits as backup to the 3 operational Tigers. As the Tigers are controlled from the central computer, if an operational Tiger goes down, simple to increase the heater duty cycle in the other 2, until the backup can be brought on line. With a good control system, there should be little variation in energy consumption.

          Then the almost boiling water is deliver to a holding tank between the lower pressure pre heat Tiger’s and the Blue Cat boilers that feed the smaller and higher pressure Blue Cats that produce the superheated steam. Believe there are several spare Blue Cat reactors as well.

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            Hello Engineer48. Long time i dont see you here. How is your project doing?

          • Bruce__H

            Engineer48 said

            “Believe the 4 Tigers are the pre heaters that bring the water temp up to just about boiling.”

            On present knowledge this turns out to be wrong. The Tigers (called the “Big Frankies” by Rossi’s crew) were the whole show. The reactors outside the Tiger units never produced any heat for the test.

      • Hi Eng48—everything fine thanks. Relevant comments.

  • Stephen

    Some thoughts about pipes:

    It mentioned I think somewhere that DN40 pipe is used for the steam pipe. Do we know the source of this?

    I’m wondering if “schedule 40” pipe was actually meant. The schedule number is associated with the wall thickness of the pipe.

    https://www.metalsupermarkets.com/what-do-pipe-schedules-mean/

    Schedule 40 pipe is often used for piping steam.

    The following links are interesting too if anyone is interested in calculating steam flows and pressure drops:

    http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/calculator/steam-pressure-loss-through-piping.html

    Lots of interesting calculators there. I’m not sure if they are all fully relevant to superheated steam.

    This link from Armstrong international in imperial units is also quite interesting:

    https://www.armstronginternational.com/files/products/traps/pdf/N1_4550.pdf

    And this one:

    http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/steam-pipe-pressure-drop-d_1129.html

    There are many such interesting calculators and tables on the internet if you search for steam pipe pressure drop.

    I haven’t yet done the calculations using a supply pressure about 0barG with a pressure drop to for example say 0.5bar at the condensor.

    But even if it is a 40mm diameter pipe would it not require a flow rate about 562m per second to pipe 36000kg of steam per day? My calculations are probably wrong as it was quite naively done but if so isn’t this well with in the specs included in the above links?

    Well I don’t know what these calculators and tables throw up or even if they are relevant with super heated steam or if the steam is drawn through suction rather than pumped from the source. But I think they are interesting. I’m curious what more knowledgeable experts from the engineering community make if it though.

    • Stephen

      Note elsewhere someone criticizing the piped steam idea who assumed it may be pumped at mentioned that it would liquify due to back pressure from the JMP end.

      On reflection this is rubbish ! All that would happen would be the pressure drop along the pipe would decrease. The back pressure would never increase beyond the supply pressure unless it was pumped back in that direction at higher pressure or further heated (note it is fact cooled and even condenses so no heating would be occurring) If there was back pressure though it would I suppose reduce the flow rate. This would then require less amount of supplied steam which might require reducing the amount of production by venting or turning off one or more units.

    • US_Citizen71

      Steam isn’t pumped it flows due to the pressure differential caused by the phase change from liquid to gas producing a positive pressure at the boiler and then from gas back to liquid producing a partial vacuum at the condenser. The condensed water is typically pumped back to the boiler and this also reinforces the pressure differential by increasing the vacuum at the condenser and increasing the pressure in the boiler.

      • Omega Z

        DN40 pipe is 12 inch ID. 2 inches bigger then what was guessed from the pictures.

        • US_Citizen71

          No problem with flowing 1MW of steam with 12 in ID. Looking better all of the time.

        • Stephen

          I think DN40 is about 1.5 inches diameter

          http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/nps-nominal-pipe-sizes-d_45.html

          But I agree with you that in the pictures it looks a lot wider.

          I think DN80 (3inches) or DN100 (4inches) would be ideal though.

  • Stephen

    Some thoughts about pipes:

    Its mentioned I think somewhere that DN40 pipe is used for the steam pipe. Do we know the source of this?

    I’m wondering if “schedule 40” pipe was actually meant. The schedule number is associated with the wall thickness of the pipe.

    https://www.metalsupermarkets.com/what-do-pipe-schedules-mean/

    Schedule 40 pipe is often used for piping steam.

    The following links are interesting too if anyone is interested in calculating steam flows and pressure drops:

    http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/calculator/steam-pressure-loss-through-piping.html

    Lots of interesting calculators there. I’m not sure if they are all fully relevant to superheated steam.

    Note they are also interesting for the condensate pipe requirements too.

    This link from Armstrong international in imperial units is also quite interesting:

    https://www.armstronginternational.com/files/products/traps/pdf/N1_4550.pdf

    And this one:

    http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/steam-pipe-pressure-drop-d_1129.html

    There are many such interesting calculators and tables on the internet if you search for steam pipe pressure drop.

    I haven’t yet done the calculations using a supply pressure about or just above 0barG (a reasonable assumption if it is 103 deg C super heated steam) with a pressure drop to for example say 0.5bar absolute at the condensor.

    But even if it is a 40mm diameter pipe would it not require a flow rate about 562m per second to pipe 36000kg of steam per day? My calculations are probably wrong as it was quite naively done but if they are correct isn’t this well with in the specs included in the above links wher flow rates of 1000’s m/s are mentioned?

    Although I should also mention steam velocities between 30 m/s and 100m/s seam more recommended for superheated steam to reduce wear and tear according to the following link.

    http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/flow-velocity-steam-pipes-d_386.html

    I suppose if it was DN100 schedule 40 pipe it’s flow rate would be right in this range though.

    Incidentally if someone who didn’t know much about pipes asked what type of pipe was used and got the verbal answer “DN100 schedule 40 pipe”. I can see how they might make an honest mistake and think it was DN40.

    That said it woulld still work fine I think with DN40 pipe at the higher flow rates.

    Well I don’t know what these calculators and tables throw up or even if they are relevant with super heated steam or if the steam is drawn through suction at the condenser rather than pumped from the source. But I think they are interesting. I’m curious what more knowledgeable experts from the engineering community make if it though.

    • Stephen

      Note elsewhere some criticizing the piped steam idea assumed it may be pumped at just over airpressure in gas phase but that it would liquify due to back pressure from the JMP end.

      On reflection this is rubbish ! All that would happen would be the pressure drop along the pipe would decrease. The back pressure would never increase beyond the supply pressure unless it was pumped back in that direction at higher pressure or further heated (note it is fact cooled and even condenses and is drained so no heating or back pumping would be occurring and if anything there will be a partial vacuums at the condensor end) If there was back pressure though it would I suppose reduce the flow rate. This would then require less amount of supplied steam which might require reducing the amount of production by venting or turning off one or more units.

      Now I guess the back pressure will self regulate the flow to some extent if well disigned, however, if there was back pressure at the JMP end of the pipe you might want to know about it to regulate the steam production so it was not wasted.

      Well probably an expert on such systems will correct me but if I’m not wrong…

    • US_Citizen71

      Steam isn’t pumped it flows due to the pressure differential caused by the phase change from liquid to gas producing a positive pressure at the boiler and then from gas back to liquid producing a partial vacuum at the condenser. The condensed water is typically pumped back to the boiler and this also reinforces the pressure differential by increasing the vacuum at the condenser and increasing the pressure in the boiler.

      I would think the steam line is likely at least 4 inches in diameter from what I remember of standards from my NAVY training 28 years ago.

      • Omega Z

        DN40 pipe is 12 inch ID. 2 inches bigger then what was guessed from the pictures.

        • US_Citizen71

          No problem with flowing 1MW of steam with 12 in ID. Looking better all of the time.

        • Stephen

          I think DN40 is about 1.5 inches diameter

          http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/nps-nominal-pipe-sizes-d_45.html

          But I agree with you that in the pictures the pipe looks a lot wider. Even if we consider the lagging.

          I think at least DN80 (3inches) or DN100 (4inches) would be ideal though.

          I do think that DN40 likely has a bit too high a flow velocity to be easily managed at the condenser / heat exchanger end but I’m guessing somewhat as this not my field.

          I guess we will have to wait and see.

        • Bob K
  • sam

    Does anyone have an opinion on this comment from ego out blog about the excess heat.Thanks

    Simon DerricuttFebruary 4, 2017 at 4:50 AM
    Peter – the value to mankind of a workable LENR solution is probably so great as to be incalculable. This is why I spend my time in research into power production. Once we can get very cheap power without having some sort of pollution as a by-product then we can produce food (indoor farming), water (condensation from air) and shelter (heated or cooled as necessary) anywhere on the world, and we can also recycle all materials rather than jettisoning them (more pollution) since the recycling costs too much in power requirements.

    You say “In NiH it seems only Rossi has MULTIPLICATIVE excess heat” and this is true, but of course I would stress the “seems” in that sentence since I still see no evidence-trail of the heat that was said to be produced. My background is in Failure Analysis – a fascinating job and I was good at it. The process requires examining all assumptions, including those that are normally hidden since “everyone knows that”. You may have noticed that I have stated that we can’t discount the possibility that Rossi saw SOME gain in the Doral test that was below the threshold of what evidence we have. However, losing 1MW of heat 24/7 for around a year is not possible – it would have been obvious where it went.

    Like most practical engineers where a lot of money can depend on getting the right answer, I’ll use several alternative methods of measurement on things that are critical, so that there is no single-point of failure. Whereas a thermocouple can give you an indication of temperature to a precision of 0.1°C very easily, there may well be errors from EMI or induction that are a lot more than the precision, so a liquid-in-glass stick thermometer gives you something to compare against that is not affected by EMI and so tells the truth, but is less precise.

    You can put forward the defence that Rossi is not a scientist but an entrepreneur, but on a practical basis the claimed results do not have the corroborative evidence that would make them acceptable. Instead, I am told that the absence of that evidence (where did the 1MW go?) will be explained later. Jed says that IH did an IR survey of the site – that 1MW should have been easily visible. It wasn’t. My prediction is that it will never be satisfactorily explained, as such an amount of heat would be noticeable without instrumentation. It will remain the elephant in the room, ignored by those who believe Rossi has the LENR+ he claims.

    I first became aware of Rossi in 2011, where he demonstrated a 1MW reactor and claimed success at around 500kW even though a 500kW Diesel generator was running the whole time. Did that reactor produce excess heat, or did it not do so? If it worked, then for the last 5 years or so we could have had a Rossi reactor working somewhere useful. Did the Lugano experiment produce excess power? If so, then for the last couple of years or so we could have had that running somewhere and people would have bought them – after all that was high-grade heat suitable for high-pressure steam turbines. There are a lot of Rossi reactors around, considering there were several (and two designs) at the Doral test. Where are they actually in use?

    If Rossi’s systems worked as claimed, then we have to assume that Rossi doesn’t care about the poor children in the world and just wants to extract the maximum amount of money. We also have to assume that the automated factories set up to mass-manufacture them are still mothballed and waiting for the “go” command. Considering the purchase cost of automation and the site costs, that’s going to be eating a lot of money just waiting, since it will also need security systems to avoid vandalism or industrial espionage.

    The evidence just doesn’t add up to the conclusion that Rossi can be telling the truth. Since you are an inventive industrial engineer, I’m surprised that you accept the holes in the story.

    Reply

    • US_Citizen71

      In my opinion this person’s background is more likely law, public relations or advertising he does not write like an engineer. His allegations are more ad hominem than technical. He has swallowed Jed’s claim that the <110C heat created by the 1MW plant should have melted the building and anything near it. Bottom line lots of hot air very few facts and content to his comment.

      edit: As an example : "Did the Lugano experiment produce excess power?" the Lugano reactor produced heat not power. It wasn't remotely designed to produce power. This is not a comment a technical person would make.

      Second example: "Jed says that IH did an IR survey of the site – that 1MW should have been easily visible." The site is a warehouse in Miami. The survey was apparently the roof of the building. The steam temperatures created were about 105C. When cooling something the cooling fluid in this case most likely air is always cooler than what is being cooled. Dumping hot air out a roof vent would not stand out enormously when compared with the solar heated roof and the multiple air conditioning compressor cooling vents up there. It seems the prefix mega confuses this person just like it did Jed into thinking the temperatures created would be so far from normal even a blind man would see them. The plant is suppose to create large quantities of heat not large temperatures.

      • hhiram

        Fair points, but the concerns about Rossi holding on to life-saving tech for too long are also valid. At some point it is simply inhumane and unethical for him to withhold his technology instead of open-sourcing everything through MFMP. He already has $10 million. He is not needed to change the world now, he could GIVE everything to Elon Musk and he would still be rich and famous and a world hero for all time.

        Instead, he is now playing like either 1) a control freak, 2) a greedy person who wants to be a billionaire instead of a millionaire, 3) a narcissist who wants more fame than he will already get if he simply gives the secrets away, or 4) simply a fraud who has been lying the whole time.

        Remember his age. He could die at any moment and take all his secrets with him.

        When is it no longer ethical for him NOT to open-source everything?

        • Andreas Moraitis

          1) Yes.
          2) I don’t think so. Except if you consider entrepreneurs in general as „greedy“.
          3) Not more than many other persons.
          4) Makes not much sense to me (there are more convenient ways to commit fraud).

        • US_Citizen71

          He is acting just like any other businessman. Has Apple, Polaroid, Motorola, GE, etc., etc. opened sourced all of their technologies? Why not? Wouldn’t the world be a better place? Why don’t we just take their patents away to make it a better world? Why because it would take away all incentive to innovate! Communism might seem like a great idea but it works horribly in reality!

          “Remember his age. He could die at any moment and take all his secrets with him.” – He has stated many times that the knowledge is safe and can be accessed if he dies.

          • hhiram

            That’s apples to oranges.

            A better comparison would be if some individual inventor was sitting on a cure to cancer or AIDS or malaria.

            And we already have heated ethical debates about pharmaceutical companies that make specific drugs hugely expensive, so just imagine the difference if one person were holding out for more money at the expense of millions of lives each year. We would rightly condemn that person as a monster.

            The only reason why this isn’t already a pressing ethical issue with huge pressure for governments to exercise eminent domain over the technology is that almost nobody takes the technology seriously.

          • roseland67

            US_

            If you bought a functioning Ecat how long before you took it apart to find out what makes it work?
            Then hire a team to replicate it?
            Make some changes to get around The patent, then file another patent?

            If the Ecat works as stated Rossi must know this will happen, no?

          • US_Citizen71

            I always thought patents were to prevent exactly what you saying. As long as you file detailed and encompassing patents.

            So are you saying no one should ever try to patent anything but it is just futile? Or does this just apply to Rossi?

          • roseland67

            I guess I asked you a question and you answered it with another question?
            That is SOP here.

            Patents are worked around every day by altering the design, construction, materials etc.

            Question # 2 for you now.

            If a working Ecat is ever sold how long do you think it will be before it is reverse engineered and this precious IP is all over the net?
            A month, a week, a day, an hour?

  • sam
    • Stephen

      I kind of regret posting it there I was curious if any one had opinions about the outputs of tools and tables that I linked there.

      The discussion about pipes was interesting to me though and I appreciated the occasional intelligent criticsm or point of view where it came up.

      i do regret the little battle that it seemed to generate though. Im not really much into division.

      Perhaps I should have known better given the lack of clear facts at this stage and I apologize if it led to offense anywhere.

      • sam

        Hi Stephen
        I am not much for division either but do like a good debate
        from knowledgeable people
        if it ends up with the correct
        conclusion.

        Regards
        Sam

    • Stephen

      I agree with the arguments so far discussed about pipe diameter based on current known data about pressures steam flow as such. Although it should be noted that in these cases the tools used are largely talking about normal pressurized steam transported through the pipe due to pressure difference.

      However if we do not write off supersonic flow of superheated steam just yet. Has any one considered choked flow?

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choked_flow

      And in particular the Fanno flow constraints.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanno_flow

      Choked flow makes use of Venturi effect:

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venturi_effect

      And requires a pressure drop at the other end of the choke to emit the steam at high velocity.

      Interestingly such systems the pipe length seems to be limited by Fanno flow constraints rather than pressure drop.

      If I understand correctly Fanno Flow introduces constraints on pipe length due to Choked flow especially at M1.

      I’m pretty certain that some who post here have some background in boiler engineering? I guess these considerations are outside the experience of a non expert such as me. If some one with that experience is here I just wonder if he can answer a few questions.

      Is possible to have supersonic flows at low pressure density?

      What kinds of pipe length would the Fanno choking constraint give rise too?

      Would there be constraints on the exit pipe such as should it be straight along the flow with out angles?

      would choked flow like this cool the gas bellow superheating temperature when released into the lower pressure environment?

      If so would the steam need to be stored a higher pressure tank at higher temperature before being released into the pipe?

      If anyone can answer in a way a non expert like me can understand I’m curious. Thanks

  • orsobubu
  • Jonnyb

    One thing puzzles me in all this. If the E-CAT was so good why has Andrea and Co. not gone ahead and produced some commercial plants, heat only. Could it be because of the Legal I.P. Row? If he has serious backing then why not start rolling this out whilst still working on the E-CATX or other Iterations. I find this very strange, even if produced outside the states, where the I.P. Row may not be covered. Any one shed any light on this?

    • One could argue that is exactly what he thought he was doing when he signed up with the Cherokee gang and formed Industrial Heat.

      Only to discover that they had no interest in allowing him to fulfill the terms of the agreement and get final payment… and that they were pursuing an IP strategy rather than a commercialization strategy and using his tech, in part, to garner massive investments from third parties and not sharing any of it with him.

      Requiring a lawsuit to fix that acts as a blockade to commercialization due to unresolved IP and other issues.

      • Jonnyb

        Thanks LENR G, does the IP argument block the E-Cat from all parts of the Globe? I thought I.H. only held licence for U.S.?

        • Not all parts, but it is more than just the US.

  • Jonnyb

    One thing puzzles me in all this. If the E-CAT was so good why has Andrea and Co. not gone ahead and produced some commercial plants, heat only. Could it be because of the Legal I.P. Row? If he has serious backing then why not start rolling this out whilst still working on the E-CATX or other Iterations. I find this very strange, even if produced outside the states, where the I.P. Row may not be covered. Any one shed any light on this?

    • One could argue that is exactly what he thought he was doing when he signed up with the Cherokee gang and formed Industrial Heat.

      Only to discover that they had no interest in allowing him to fulfill the terms of the agreement and get final payment… and that they were pursuing an IP strategy rather than a commercialization strategy and using his tech, in part, to garner massive investments from third parties and not sharing any of it with him.

      Requiring a lawsuit to fix that acts as a blockade to commercialization due to unresolved IP and other issues.

      • Jonnyb

        Thanks LENR G, does the IP argument block the E-Cat from all parts of the Globe? I thought I.H. only held licence for U.S.?

        • Not all parts, but it is more than just the US.

  • GiveADogABone

    129-01-Exhibit 1: The ‘Daily Energy Absorption’ graph compares Fabiani/Penon and FPL data. IH makes much of the overlap of the graphs in November 2015.

    I ask the question which FPL data? The FPL data in the graph looks like the data from the 128-02-Exhibit-2 which presumably comes from the JM Chemicals warehouse. Where is the similar FPL bill for the E-cat warehouse?

    • Obvious

      The ecat part was inside the warehouse rented by JMP. There is only one FLP meter for the warehouse. A PCE-830 measured the consumption of the Plant.

      • GiveADogABone

        Thanks for the response.
        Doral Electrical Supplies :
        Rossi has stated that the E-cat had a 300kw electrical supply. I would expect that to be 3-phase. It is possible that the permanent supply at Doral would be 2-phase and considerably less than able to take an additional load of 300kw.

        The question then arises, “Where did the upstream end of the temporary 300kw supply to the E-cat terminate?”. My answer would be, “On a spare breaker on the main distribution board for the whole building.”. That breaker would be fitted with its own meter.

        The upshot of this is that there would be TWO FLP billing meters supplying the warehouse. The one that supplies the E-cat should read the same as the E-cat consumption recorded by Fabiani/Penon if the JMC hidden plant is fed from the permanent meter.

        The permanent meter has the building services loads (lights, fans, office machinery and air-conditioning, etc) and the JMC plant. That suggests the JMC plant draws about 20kw or less and the uneven curve is caused by the building services being operated in the weekly cycle.

        The fact that the E-cat only draws about 10kw at full output was not anticipated. If the permanent meter was feeding building services, JMC hidden plant and the E-cat, the reversed curves in November could only be regarded as much worse than an insignificant dip and IH would have a point. I have to conclude that the permanent meter did not feed the E-cat.

        • Obvious

          The weekly cycle is interesting. The Plant is running 24 hrs/day, 7 days a week.
          And yet the building has major power drops almost every Saturday. Below is an updated power plot. FLP de-spiked means I averaged the two days where a huge up-down spike occurs at the end of each month (seems to be related to a billing cycle cut-off, so some major spike are artifacts).
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/873e896494ef8774a07949b59ae799eeb0e42dab5b279d8022015b6a68dc03fe.jpg

          • GiveADogABone

            It is tempting to interpret the weekend drops for the building as being the air-conditioning being turned off in the offices. A 1kW motor, running continuously, in the a/c would give a 24kWh drop in the daily reading when it was switched off at weekends.

            Again tempting to infer the JMC hidden plant electrical power curve joins up the low points at weekends.

            The up-down spikes I have seen before. When logging my heat pump at home I targeted the daily readings for 0900 hours but inevitably missed from time to time. A 25 or 26 hour period gave a high reading that automatically gave a low reading for the next day as that was only 22 or 23 hours. I never took readings early, so the high reading came first.

  • GiveADogABone

    129-01-Exhibit 1: The ‘Daily Energy Absorption’ graph compares Fabiani/Penon and FPL data. IH makes much of the overlap of the graphs in November 2015.

    I ask the question which FPL data? The FPL data in the graph looks like the data from the 128-02-Exhibit-2 which presumably comes from the JM Chemicals warehouse. Where is the similar FPL bill for the E-cat warehouse?

    • Obvious

      The ecat part was inside the warehouse unit rented by JMP. There is only one FLP meter for each warehouse unit. A PCE-830 measured the consumption of the Plant.

      • GiveADogABone

        Thanks for the response.
        Doral Electrical Supplies :
        Rossi has stated that the E-cat had a 300kw electrical supply. I would expect that to be 3-phase. It is possible that the permanent supply at Doral would be 2-phase and considerably less than able to take an additional load of 300kw.

        The question then arises, “Where did the upstream end of the temporary 300kw supply to the E-cat terminate?”. My answer would be, “On a spare breaker on the main distribution board for the whole building.”. That breaker would be fitted with its own meter.

        The upshot of this is that there would be TWO FLP billing meters supplying the warehouse. The one that supplies the E-cat should read the same as the E-cat consumption recorded by Fabiani/Penon if the JMC hidden plant is fed from the permanent meter.

        The permanent meter has the building services loads (lights, fans, office machinery and air-conditioning, etc) and the JMC plant. That suggests the JMC plant draws about 20kw or less and the uneven curve is caused by the building services being operated in the weekly cycle.

        The fact that the E-cat only draws about 10kw at full output was not anticipated. If the permanent meter was feeding building services, JMC hidden plant and the E-cat, the reversed curves in November could only be regarded as much worse than an insignificant dip and IH would have a point. I have to conclude that the permanent meter did not feed the E-cat.

        • Obvious

          The weekly cycle is interesting. The Plant is running 24 hrs/day, 7 days a week.
          And yet the building has major power drops almost every Saturday. Below is an updated power plot. FLP de-spiked means I averaged the two days where a huge up-down spike occurs at the end of each month (seems to be related to a billing cycle cut-off, so the major spikes are artifacts).
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/873e896494ef8774a07949b59ae799eeb0e42dab5b279d8022015b6a68dc03fe.jpg

          • GiveADogABone

            It is tempting to interpret the weekend drops for the building as being the air-conditioning being turned off in the offices. A 1kW motor, running continuously, in the a/c would give a 24kWh drop in the daily reading when it was switched off at weekends.

            Again tempting to infer the JMC hidden plant electrical power curve joins up the low points at weekends.

            The up-down spikes I have seen before. When logging my heat pump at home I targeted the daily readings for 0900 hours but inevitably missed from time to time. A 25 or 26 hour period gave a high reading that automatically gave a low reading for the next day as that was only 22 or 23 hours. I never took readings early, so the high reading came first.

  • Stephen

    I think Ged has discussed the steam pipe before in an earlier thread about 3months ago where he had a nice picture of the plant with the steam pipe going over the wall. And the return pipe also shown. Unfortunately I can’t find it now. Can someone link it.

    But I remember it was pretty thick the insulation must have been huge if it was 1.5 inches pipe.

    The link below gives typical insulation thicknesses for pipes

    http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/pipes-insulation-thickness-d_16.html.

    • Stephen

      Ahh yes I think it was here in this post:

      https://disqus.com/home/discussion/ecw/e_cat_plant_test_plan_fabio_penon/#comment-2976081226

      Well talk about de-ja-vue it looks everything was already clear regarding the pipe at least back then.

      I definitely regret bringing it up again now. oh well.

    • Gerald

      Based on the picture and pixel count, subtracting 3″ of insulation my best quess would be a DN100 or DN150 pipe. Didn’t engineer48 did all this before?

      • Stephen

        Yup it’s very likely Engineer 48 did. after re-reading the old thread I get the impression I’m returning to old ground.

  • Stephen

    I think Ged has discussed the steam pipe before in an earlier thread about 3months ago where he had a nice picture of the plant with the steam pipe going over the wall. And the return pipe also shown. Unfortunately I can’t find it now. Can someone link it.

    But I remember it was pretty thick the insulation must have been huge if it was 1.5 inches DN40 pipe.

    The link below gives typical insulation thicknesses for pipes

    http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/pipes-insulation-thickness-d_16.html.

    Well let’s put it this way to me the steam pipe with insulation might have been more than 4.5 – 5 inches thick.

    • Stephen

      Ahh yes I think it was here in this post:

      https://disqus.com/home/discussion/ecw/e_cat_plant_test_plan_fabio_penon/#comment-2976081226

      http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/E-CatDoral.jpg

      Well talk about deja-vu it looks everything was already clear regarding the pipe at least back then.

      I definitely regret bringing it up again now. oh well.

      6.5 inches would be about right if the return pipe is DN80 and also has 1.5 inch lagging though.

      I wonder if we can estimate the steam pipe width if we assume lagging thickness about 2inches? It’s definitely wider than the return pipe.

      • Gerald

        Somewhat with a big margin off course. Pipe diameters based on the left door almost open against the pipe and the door is 2280mm, 98,8 inch. The following is the outcome when I count pixels.. Again, big big margins, just a aproximate.

        Door height 2280 mm (standard shipping container)
        pixels mm inch
        Door 73 2280 89,8
        Steampipe pixels min 7 219 8,6
        Steampipe pixels max 8 250 9,8
        Return pipe pixels min 4 125 4,9
        Return pipe pixels max 5 156 6,2

        Steampipe with insulation avg 234 9,2
        Return pipe avg 141 5,5

        • Stephen

          Thanks a lot Gerald

    • Gerald

      Based on the picture and pixel count, subtracting 3″ of insulation my best quess would be a DN100 or DN150 pipe. Didn’t engineer48 did all this before?

      • Stephen

        Yup it’s very likely Engineer 48 did. after re-reading the old thread I get the impression I’m returning to old ground.

  • Stephen

    Thanks a lot Gerald

  • Husky

    A new file in the court case docks appeared and it seems like suddenly the Boeing Company is part of the Rossi case o_O

    They filed some LENR Patents, too but i guess nobody would have expected them to be a part in THAT case

  • Husky

    A new file in the court case docks appeared and it seems like suddenly the Boeing Company is part of the Rossi case o_O

    They filed some LENR Patents, too but i guess nobody would have expected them to be a part in THAT case

  • Michelangelo De Meo

    imagine if the two instruments have different results because what would the ill thinking of IH !!! All hell broke loose !!! In reality ‘anything Rossi says or they face the slander to fregargli due. If they saw him walking on the water and would say that ‘a fool’ cause at his age ‘has not yet learned to swim !!

  • sam

    Comment from Lenr forum

    MrSelfSustain
    Verified User
    16 hours ago
    Rossi has claimed self sustained operation from the earliest days of his research. This test seems to be an example of one of his systems performing at high power in self-sustain mode. This was one of his earliest systems, but he continued to assert — up until the Quark X — that every one of his reactors were capable of self sustaining without input while producing high levels of output. Continual operation at high power output without input is the Holy Grail of cold fusion research. And, if you can achieve it utilizing a cheap element like nickel (or recycling reverse spillover catalysts like palladium) the paradigm shattering potential goes up even higher. As far as I’m concerned, the whole freaking debate about Andrea Rossi and the validity of his technology should revolve around his technologies ability to self sustain at high power. This is the most central specific claim he’s made about his technology. After claiming to be able to achieve self sustain from the start (TEN YEARS AGO) he should certainly be able to produce the same results today with his increased knowledge, experience, know how, and understanding of the Rossi Effect. I personally have no doubt he is capable of making systems self sustain — although others feel differently. Now, if he would ever be willing to openly and completely share such know how with another party is up for debate. I think the truth is that the so called “secret sauce” isn’t too hard to figure out if someone with an obsessive compulsive mindset and a crazy work ethic is willing to run experiments non-stop for a couple months. I think this is how Me356 figured out how to get results.

    Back to what I was speaking about, I think the whole debate about COPs of 1, 1.3, 2, and so on is a total joke. Even higher COPs that may seem more significant (lets say 3-10) are meaningless when self sustained operation is possible. I personally wish that the judge would look at Andrea Rossi and say, “You’ve been claiming that your reactors can operate for hours at a time without input for ten years. I’ve reviewed the patents, documents, transcripts, and blog posts where you have repeated this hundreds of times. If this lawsuit is going to continue, I want to see such a reactor operate with my own eyes with my own court appointed engineers taking measurements.”

    If Rossi wanted to do so, I am confident he could satisfy such a request from the judge. But I’m not convinced that even under direct threat of life imprisonment that he’d obey an order that he didn’t agree with — even if he lost everything. But I think if some sort of request or push for such a test could be made, it would be far more productive than squabbling and debating about low COP figures. With the so called “hot cats” we’re depending on temperature figures from IR cameras that can be debated for months on end. Such never ending arguments have happened on this forum! With such a self sustaining system, a control and an active system (the only difference being one with hydrogen and one with none) would have an equal amounts of power supplied. If after warm up and triggering the self sustaining system operated for hours producing a flow of heat with no input power (AFTER THE CONTROL COOLED DOWN TO NEAR AMBIENT) the evidence would be rock solid. You wouldn’t need a freaking IR camera and advanced calculations to see what was taking place!

    I sure hope in the deposition of Andrea Rossi that his claims about self sustained operation of his systems are brought up again and again. His under oath answers about them should be placed on the record. Maybe his description of getting a reactor up and running (with only heat/pressure variations), cutting the power off, and allowing it to run for hours at a time in self sustain mode would entice the judge to ask for proof!

    Again, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know if there is any realistic situation in which a judge would ask for a demonstration in a case like this. But if I were IH, it would by my number one goal if my lawyers claimed the strategy was viable.

    If I end up reading excerpts from Rossi’s deposition where low COPs are debated, I’ll probably barf.

    Again, HE CLAIMS THE FREAKING HOLY GRAIL AND HAS FROM ThE START!

    • Vinney

      The QuarkX is the size of a needle, Can be easily setup in court. It has input (3-phase AC) of 0.5watt with the reactor reaching temperatures of 1400 degree (C), output from 10 to 20 watts. It is ‘impossible’ to hide much in something the size of a pin. This could easily be setup in court to show what he means by LENR +.

  • sam

    Comment from Lenr forum

    MrSelfSustain
    Verified User
    16 hours ago
    Rossi has claimed self sustained operation from the earliest days of his research. This test seems to be an example of one of his systems performing at high power in self-sustain mode. This was one of his earliest systems, but he continued to assert — up until the Quark X — that every one of his reactors were capable of self sustaining without input while producing high levels of output. Continual operation at high power output without input is the Holy Grail of cold fusion research. And, if you can achieve it utilizing a cheap element like nickel (or recycling reverse spillover catalysts like palladium) the paradigm shattering potential goes up even higher. As far as I’m concerned, the whole freaking debate about Andrea Rossi and the validity of his technology should revolve around his technologies ability to self sustain at high power. This is the most central specific claim he’s made about his technology. After claiming to be able to achieve self sustain from the start (TEN YEARS AGO) he should certainly be able to produce the same results today with his increased knowledge, experience, know how, and understanding of the Rossi Effect. I personally have no doubt he is capable of making systems self sustain — although others feel differently. Now, if he would ever be willing to openly and completely share such know how with another party is up for debate. I think the truth is that the so called “secret sauce” isn’t too hard to figure out if someone with an obsessive compulsive mindset and a crazy work ethic is willing to run experiments non-stop for a couple months. I think this is how Me356 figured out how to get results.

    Back to what I was speaking about, I think the whole debate about COPs of 1, 1.3, 2, and so on is a total joke. Even higher COPs that may seem more significant (lets say 3-10) are meaningless when self sustained operation is possible. I personally wish that the judge would look at Andrea Rossi and say, “You’ve been claiming that your reactors can operate for hours at a time without input for ten years. I’ve reviewed the patents, documents, transcripts, and blog posts where you have repeated this hundreds of times. If this lawsuit is going to continue, I want to see such a reactor operate with my own eyes with my own court appointed engineers taking measurements.”

    If Rossi wanted to do so, I am confident he could satisfy such a request from the judge. But I’m not convinced that even under direct threat of life imprisonment that he’d obey an order that he didn’t agree with — even if he lost everything. But I think if some sort of request or push for such a test could be made, it would be far more productive than squabbling and debating about low COP figures. With the so called “hot cats” we’re depending on temperature figures from IR cameras that can be debated for months on end. Such never ending arguments have happened on this forum! With such a self sustaining system, a control and an active system (the only difference being one with hydrogen and one with none) would have an equal amounts of power supplied. If after warm up and triggering the self sustaining system operated for hours producing a flow of heat with no input power (AFTER THE CONTROL COOLED DOWN TO NEAR AMBIENT) the evidence would be rock solid. You wouldn’t need a freaking IR camera and advanced calculations to see what was taking place!

    I sure hope in the deposition of Andrea Rossi that his claims about self sustained operation of his systems are brought up again and again. His under oath answers about them should be placed on the record. Maybe his description of getting a reactor up and running (with only heat/pressure variations), cutting the power off, and allowing it to run for hours at a time in self sustain mode would entice the judge to ask for proof!

    Again, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know if there is any realistic situation in which a judge would ask for a demonstration in a case like this. But if I were IH, it would by my number one goal if my lawyers claimed the strategy was viable.

    If I end up reading excerpts from Rossi’s deposition where low COPs are debated, I’ll probably barf.

    Again, HE CLAIMS THE FREAKING HOLY GRAIL AND HAS FROM ThE START!

    • Vinney

      The QuarkX is the size of a needle, Can be easily setup in court. It has input (3-phase AC) of 0.5watt with the reactor reaching temperatures of 1400 degree (C), output from 10 to 20 watts. It is ‘impossible’ to hide much in something the size of a pin. This could easily be setup in court to show what he means by LENR +.

  • US_Citizen71

    I always thought patents were to prevent exactly what you saying. As long as you file detailed and encompassing patents.

    So are you saying no one should ever try to patent anything but it is just futile? Or does this just apply to Rossi?

  • Stephen

    Am I right in recalling that there were 3 sets of meters used on the E-Cat plant.

    1 set for LC,
    1 set for the ERV (Penon)
    1 set for IH.

    And also that Andrea Rossi mentioned all 3 sets of data agreed.

    Is this correct?

    If so is the set attributed to Fabiani for the LC set or for the IH set?

    Do we have the data for the third set.

    Were other meters placed elsewhere on the equipment I wonder.If I was placing meters I might be curious to see the steam flow for example as well as the condensate water flow. So I wonder if an ultrasonic or vortex steam flow meter was used on the steam pipe.

    After seeing the size of the lagged steam pipe in the photo of the e-cat i would be very surprised if it was 1.5 inch (40mm) DN40. If it was it would imply 4 to 5 inches of lagging which would be a bit strange for such a narrow pipe. 1.5 to 2 inches of lagging in steam pipes is more normal according to official data I found online.

  • Stephen

    Am I right in recalling that there were 3 sets of meters used on the E-Cat plant?

    1 set for LC,
    1 set for the ERV (Penon)
    1 set for IH.

    And also that Andrea Rossi mentioned all 3 sets of data agreed.

    Is this correct?

    If so is the set attributed to Fabiani for the LC set or for the IH set?

    Do we have the data for the third set.

    Were other meters placed elsewhere on the equipment I wonder.If I was placing meters I might be curious to see the steam flow for example as well as the condensate water flow. So I wonder if an ultrasonic or vortex steam flow meter was used on the steam pipe.

    After seeing the size of the lagged steam pipe in the photo of the e-cat i would be very surprised if it was 1.5 inch (40mm) DN40. If it was it would imply 4 to 5 inches of lagging which would be a bit strange for such a narrow pipe. 1.5 to 2 inches of lagging in steam pipes is more normal according to official data I found online.

  • Stephen

    Some interesting on line calculators for the properties is steam, superheated steam and water

    http://www.peacesoftware.de/einigewerte/wasser_dampf_e.html

  • Stephen

    Some interesting on line calculators for the properties of steam, superheated steam and water

    http://www.peacesoftware.de/einigewerte/wasser_dampf_e.html

  • Stephen

    A crazy question but could we see any evidence of SSM from these graphs or would the sample resolution be too low?

    But perhaps even if the SSM is not directly apparent we can see when it was in operation from the efficiency.

  • Stephen

    A crazy question but could we see any evidence of SSM from these graphs or would the sample resolution be too low?

    But perhaps even if the SSM is not directly apparent we can see what periods it was in operation from the efficiency.