What to Expect at the E-Cat QX Presentation

Turning our attention away from the court case/settlement for a moment, and looking towards October, when Andrea Rossi says that his presentation of the E-Cat QX will take place, here’s a Q&A on the Journal of Nuclear Physics this evening gives us an idea of what to expect if and when Andrea Rossi makes the planned presentation.

Rick
July 19, 2017 at 1:41 PM
Dear Andrea Rossi,
The measurements you will make on the Ecat QX during the presentation of October will be based on the Wien and Boltzmann equation as the ones described in the Gullstrom-Rossi paper?
Thank you,
Rick

Andrea Rossi
July 19, 2017 at 9:13 PM
Rick:
No, It will be plain and simple calorimetry. We will have a flow of water that will not change phase, well below 100 Celsius degrees, a measurement of the water flowing through the plant and a measurement of the delta T and of the electric energy consumed by the E-Cat QX. Plain and simple.
Warm Regards,
A.R

in the experiment described in the Gullstroem/Rossi paper, the temperature was measured using a spectrometer, and therefore it was necessary to employ the Wien and Boltzmann equations to determine the energy output of the reactor. The calorimetry experiment that Rossi describes should make things much simpler.

Now, I am sure that like any other test that has been published over the years, there will be a great deal of critical analysis of this test. The key data in this test will be the input power (electrical) and output power (heat), and it will be very important that they are calculated correctly. Rossi, or whoever is taking measurements, will need to have accurate, calibrated measurement instruments, and the reporting of the results will need to be clear.

As preparations are made for the test, maybe Andrea Rossi and/or others involved would be reading threads like this, so it might be helpful if readers posted any suggestions or advice in the comments.
.

  • Italo R.

    The most correct devices to measure delta T are simply glass thermometers.
    No electric devices like thermocouples or similar.
    Obviously those devices have to be used for data logging.

    • Frank Acland

      My understanding is this is to be a live streamed event. If glass thermometers were used it would be necessary for one camera be dedicated to the thermometer throughout the whole test.

      • Italo R.o

        Yes, and in this case it could also show the instantaneous flow of water, and the DC values of voltage and current that feed he reactor. This allows to make instant calculations of COP.

    • Mylan

      I wonder how the flow will be measured. If a flow meter is used it would be ideal to have simple bucket weighing as a control.

  • Stephen

    I’m sure he has considered this but i think it’s probably really important that this demonstration runs as smoothly as possible on the day.

    I hope he can perform a mini test campaign leading up to the demonstration for training purposes and to iron out any bugs to make sure things run as smooth as possible during the demonstration and any problems are quickly found and resolved if they do occur then.

    Perhaps a small dress rehearsal with the final set up a few days before the demonstration would also be good to be sure everything is connected and up and running as expected.

    If one or two or a few good trusted witnesses attended the dress rehearsal it could be good for comparison if questions we’re raised during the actual demonstration. If those witnesses had some kind of media background as well as engineering background perhaps they could help prepare advance media material regarding the test, anticipate questions and prepare answers for the actual demonstration etc.

    Just some things I think might help but I’m sure what ever approach he decides it will be good if people supporters and skeptics alike anticipate possible issues and provide good points here before the test.

    • Bruce Williams

      These are excellent suggestions

  • Gerard McEk

    I indeed hope it will be a simple test, where people can check these measurements. If the COP is high than there is no need to measure the exact power running into the reactor, but measure the input power at the mains plug. That measurement is less complex, but includes the losses in the electronics controlling the E-cat QX. Having a connection to measure the mains current shape (using a current (DC-HF) probe and oscilloscope) is essential for determining if the used calibrated power meter is certified for it.

    Using a flow-based calometry should show all the tubing to and from the reactor and calorymeter. Acces for additional glass thermometers to check the installed thermometers in the in- and output water flows. As said below, it should be possible to collect during some time water to check the flow meter.

    I volunteer for checking the test, but MFMP is also equipped to do this and I have full confidence they would do this properly.

    • Bob Matulis

      With the very high claimed COP why not have the energy output converted to electricity (Sterling engine?) and have the power go into a battery that inputs into the device. This set up would provide a reliable power source. If it can run self sustained for a long enough period of time chemical reactions can be ruled out.

      By making self sustained all possible errors such as input power measurement become NA.

      • Gerard McEk

        Yes I agree. SSM is possible, but Andrea does not want to use only that energy to drive the QX because of safety reasons. Maybe when excess electrical energy is buffered in batteries, it can be done, he agreed with Engineer48.

  • Martin Lund

    The ideal presentation/test would include a small isolated E-cat QX system which total energy output will demonstrate to exceed many times the maximum chemical energy represented by the systems total volume. Such system should run off a battery (with a DC-AC inverter if required). No mains allowed or any other external connection – fully isolated.

    I would be disappointed to see yet another test which result leaves us too many open questions/doubts. This time we need something more convincing and unequivocal.

  • DocSiders

    For this E-Cat QX test Rossi needs to perform a real control run… unlike “Lugano” where the “control run” was performed at a different electrical current load and different temperature than the “loaded run” (and therefore wasn’t actually a “control run” at all).

    Do a control run with exactly the same electrical current input over the same period of time as the “loaded run”. A COP > 3 will be obvious in the output comparisons.

    Then at the same time in the same room, have an electrical generator…powered by a Sterling engine… powered by a bunch of QX’s…driving an obvious load (like a bank of 100 watt lightbulbs) …running continuously… CLOSE THE LOOP ALREADY !!! and let it run for a week or 2 under live streaming video. Let any observer prove an outside power source to win the big stack of $100 bills sitting on the table next to the QX’s. All this is in view of the continuously streaming video so we can all see some notable skeptics confirm the isolation.

    Rossi will do neither.

  • Steve Swatman

    I will be very happy to see a Qx connected to a small battery (DC/AC) inverter boil a pot of water.

    • Martin Lund

      And served for tea to Steven Weinberg.

  • Rene

    I expect a power consumption test with no open energy inputs. The Doral setup demonstrated just how easy it is to mess around with input power and flow rate measurements. I expect a verifiable independent 3rd party to set up the calorimetry, someone like MFMP.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Very happy to oblige.

    • TOUSSAINT francois

      That would be cool !

  • Bob Greenyer

    I have learned recently that the water must not go above 60ºC otherwise bubbles of nitrogen come out of the water which go to the top of the heat exchanging apparatus (especially coils) and make it very difficult to do steady state analysis because the system sputters causing all kinds of irregularities, this cam from decades of experience from Dr. George Egely.

    There are two options.

    1. Ensure water never goes above 60ºC
    2. Boil ALL water for around 10 minutes and use ONLY that water.

    This is why we intended to only heat to 60ºC for ECCO.

  • Julius C

    Do you really believe there will be any public demonstration in Oct.2017 by Rossi? The most likely possibility is there will be nothing due to some delay. The second most likely is that there will be a private test shrouded in secrecy and Rossi will announce amazing results with no mechanism for anyone to confirm the results. If you think otherwise, you haven’t been paying attention.

    • Teemu Soilamo

      The possibility of ‘nothing’ happening is certainly not trivial.

      For example, here are a couple things that Rossi has said about the presentation of the QX prototype before:
      ———————-
      Dear Andrea Rossi,

      considering the many variables we must consider (technical, legal, political) and consequently the difficulty in being precise in predictions, may you now make a schedule of upcoming major deadlines in the long road of E-Cat?

      I’m sure that on certain issues you will be forced to repeat yourself, but I think it is interesting to have an overall timing pattern that reflects your feelings today. Obviously without obligation . . .

      Thanks so much,

      Eugenio

      Andrea Rossi
      August 30, 2016 at 8:44 AM
      Eugenio Mieli:
      1- continue the manufacturing of the industrial plants: NOW
      2- complete the R&D of the QuarkX to sell the first unit: within 2016
      3- presentation of the QuarkX prototype: within 2016
      4- start massive production of the E-Cats in the USA and in Sweden: 2017- 2018
      Thank you for your attention,
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.
      ———————-
      Joe Klecko
      November 25, 2016 at 5:31 AM
      Dear Andrea:
      As of today, how many probabilities are there that within February 2017 important information will be released concerning your work?

      Andrea Rossi
      November 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM
      Joe Klecko:
      I’d say between 60 and 70%.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

  • US_Citizen71

    As the E-Cat QX appears to be DC powered, the power system should be a battery pack. This should not be a problem the pack on my E-Bike is 48V with 11.6Ah of storage and barely larger than a standard coffee thermos. The entire setup should be raised from the test table on either a glass or clear acrylic stand that is not affixed to the table. This way it can be moved around while functioning and kill any thoughts of hidden wires. Small casters would help with this as well as a piece of plywood or similar that can be examined and laid down before placing the setup on top. All temperature measurements should include both digital and and analog thermometers, I would recommend against using any type of wired connection for data logging. There are plenty of wireless and self logging digital thermometer out that should work with the tap water temperatures the demonstration will be using. The thermometers should be checked with ice water and boiling water just before they are installed as part of the demonstration. Water used from the calorimetry should be pumped from one reservoir to another, with temperatures being measured in both reservoirs. This will allow both mass and volume checks on the water that has been flowed.

    • Dr. Mike

      All good ideas! This would enable the input power for the system COP calculation to be measured with a DC ammeter and a DC voltmeter. There is a possibility the control system produces high frequency pulses to the actual device so the input to the device would still need to be checked with an oscilloscope.

  • Dr. Mike

    Great to hear Rossi’s plan for measuring the output power with a water flow rate high enough that there will be no phase change of the water which should lead to a reliable measurement of the output power. It would be beneficial to replace the E-Cat QX with a resistive heater operating at the nominal output power of the E-Cat QX to verify the calorimetry. The key for an accurate COP measurement should include a look at the input signal to the E-Cat QX with an oscilloscope to verify the device is not receiving any high frequency power that would not be measured by whatever instrument is being used to measure the input power. It would also be a good idea to measure the input power to the E-Cat QX plus its control system (checking with an oscilloscope) to determine a system COP.

    • Bob Greenyer

      As said below – the temperature of the water needs to be kept to below 60ºC to avoid Nitrogen coming out of the water and making the results unreliable OR ALL of the water needs to be boiled for around 10 mins to begin with.

      • Stephen

        Hi Bob would demineralized water or distilled water still have this attribute?

        If mineral oil is used instead of water could it have similar constraints?

        • Bob Greenyer

          distilled water will re-absorb N2

          Mineral or other suitable oils of, may smell if leaks onto hot surface.

      • Thomas Kaminski

        I am really surprised that the nitrogen would change the heat capacity of water that much. Solubility of nitrogen in water is quite small. What is the error (in percent) if it is ignored?

        Also, at the 20Watt power level, even a small trickle of water in a flow calorimeter would be enough to keep water from boiling. I would guess that a volumetric pump, such as those used for infusion would be enough to get accurate readings. Also, you want a large enough temperature lift to make accurate temperature readings.

        Another concern for a 20Watt device is thermal leakage paths. From the image presented in the paper, my guess is that the thermal leakage through the end clamps and wires will be significant.

        Of course, all of this can be calibrated out and compensated for. Placing a 20Watt resistive thermal load in place of the QuarkX could be used for a reference.

        • Bob Greenyer

          It is not about changing heat capacity – it is about forming bubbles in the heat exchanger and that causing non steady state which means by choosing different time slices, you may get different COPs.

          • Thomas Kaminski

            I see — still, it is likely not to cause much of a problem over the run. The COP should be calculated over the entire run — though the instantaneous value might be of interest. I have tested solar thermal arrays with solar input changing due to clouds on a minute-by-minute basis. What counts is how much power do I get over the day. We never had an issue and used tap water.

          • Bob Greenyer

            yes, but when you know you will not have any problems if you work below 60ºC, why not do it?

          • Thomas Kaminski

            Well, we never tested solar arrays above 60C intentionally. Once, an evacuated tube solar array sitting in the sun got hot enough to soften the solder on copper pipes and blew its top from the steam pressure….

    • US_Citizen71

      The output signal to the E-Cat QX is likely considered proprietary by Rossi, so I do not think we will see an oscilloscope on the lines to the reactor. With a COP of 22000 or even 2000 measuring the power into the system should be good enough. The COP be will be reduced by any losses in the control system but the true net energy gain of the system will be seen.

      • Dr. Mikie

        I certainly would be satisfied with just knowing the system COP without actually measuring the power to the device. However, it would be really sad if only the power to the device is measured with a claim that the device is only receiving dc or low frequency ac power. The power into the control system should be checked with an oscilloscope even if it is driven by a box that is claimed to just be a battery to verify that no hidden high frequency power sources are affecting the power calculation going to the system.

      • Engineer48

        Hi USC,

        There is a TekTronix digital scope to the left of the left most QX reactor.

        Would suggest it is there because it was used.

        However it the signals contain Rossi “Secret Sauce” then they will probably never be released.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/f60c2ed3800b910a8c2275baacaa473bcb074f43efa353611fa2c1a5bd3ac350.png

  • Stephen

    I think I read somewhere in his replies on JONP earlier this year that due to the temperatures involved he intends to use mineral oil rather than water for the calorimetery.

    This would also be consistent with his use of mineral oil in the recent paper covered in the other post.

    I wonder if we could check what fluid he intends to use and why.

    Or if perhaps he is intending to use mineral oil as primary heat exchange medium but transferring heat to water through a heat exchanger?

    Also if mineral oil is used does any one forsee any potential issue or questions regarding this.

    Bobs point about Nitrogen in water comes to mind. Could there be similar issues with Mineral oil and what constraints should it ideally be held under? Or would the effect if any be small in magnitude and high COP make such issues mute in this case?

    I suppose mineral oil designed as a heat echange medium is specially designed to avoid such issues though.

    Of course if he is using water only then we don’t need to consider this extra point.

  • sam

    Dear Andrea,
    Your latest paper you made with Gullström cause many discussions on ECW.
    My assumption is that the E-cat QX generates a voltage while in operation. This voltage is being used to control the current through the QX. If the QX is off and you want to switch it on the control system needs to supply a voltage, which is about to be reduced to zero when the QX is started.
    Just to end these discussions: Does this describe the control of the QX close enough?
    Thank you for answering our questions.
    Kind regards, Ger

    Andrea Rossi

    July 21, 2017 at 5:50 PM

    Gerard McEk:
    I am not going to release more information before the presentation.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Omega Z

    Ceo is going to build a conventional power plant. Should Rossi give a perfect demo, Ceo will still build a conventional power plant. WHY?

    Because the power plant is needed now. Rossi’s technology will still require years of work before it is ever available for the power plant. It has nothing to do with greed. It has to do with the reality of the situation.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Yes, but those procedures should be followed. We should help claimants achieve unquestionable results.

  • Thomas Kaminski

    Flow s difficult to control due to the inaccuracies in the flow sensor. It is easier to use calibrated volumetric pumps with a settable flow rate, such as those used to infuse drugs. I always thought that a series heater with one controlled by the QX heat output and a second electrically controlled to match the QX output would be a good test setup. Flow is not critical, since the same flow is in both units. By measuring the electrical input to each stage (QX and Second Electrical Heater), you get the COP and flow drops out of the equation. The second controller matches the Delta T of the QX stage by varying electrical input power. The first stage is a QX; the second a dummy stage physically similar to the first, but with an electrical heater.

  • Buck

    Steve Karels worked through the math on how quickly a single E-Cat QX module will raise xxx Liters of water 1C.

    I share the answer, building upon Steve’s work, because it gives an easier volume/time scale for me to understand. And it points to a scale for the demonstration this October.

    It will take 3.09 minutes to raise 1L of water 1C.

    =================================

    Steven N. Karels
    July 25, 2017 at 12:54 PM

    Dear Andrea Rossi,

    You posted “Flow heating: 1.58 C / 1.8″ x 11 g”
    Just to make sure we understand your nomenclature:
    11 grams of water flowed over 1.8 seconds causing a change in temperature of the water of 1.58C.
    Water flow rate past the reactor = 11 grams / 1.8 sec = 6.1 grams of water per second
    The thermal change rate was 1.58C in 1.8 seconds or 0.88C/sec
    Therefore, the amount of water raised 1C in one second was 6.1 grams of water raising 0.88C in one second or 5.4

    grams of water was raised 1C in one second
    A Calorie is defined as raising 1 gram of water at normal pressure 1 C and 1 Calorie = 4.186 Joules
    So raising 5.4 grams of water 1 C in one second required 5.4 Calories or 22.47W

    Is this interpretation correct?

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Andrea Rossi
    July 25, 2017 at 2:24 PM

    Steven N. Karels:

    Thank you for your insight,

    Warm Regards,

    A.R.