Rossi: 40 Percent of the Way to Industrialization

Many of us wonder how things are progressing in Andrea Rossi’s stated goal to start production of his E-Cat plants this year. As is typical, we get very few details of what is going on behind the scenes at Leonardo Corp., but once in a while Rossi gives a bit of a status update. Today on the the Journal of Nuclear Physics was this exchange:

Anonymous
March 26, 2018 at 8:14 PM
Can you give us an idea, after the first quarter of 2018, what is the percentage of accomplishments of:
1- perfection of the module to industrialize
2- industrialization system

Andrea Rossi
March 27, 2018 at 7:39 AM
Anonymous:
1- 40%
2- 40%
Warm Regards,
A.R.

I had asked Rossi earlier what were the main tasks that needed to be accomplished before industrialization could start, and he responded:

Andrea Rossi
March 26, 2018 at 1:45 PM
Frank Acland:
I prefer not to enter in these particulars, but what is troubling us more is the definition of all the particulars of the modules before a bulk production: if you make an error in this issue you get the errors in all the modules, with the consequences you can imagine.
But many other issues remain and I want not to disclose them.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

If you are going to produce anything automatically, you obviously have to get the automation procedures just right, or you will mass produce faulty products, which would be disastrous. The 40 per cent figure is clearly just a ball park estimate, getting to 100 per cent this year still seems very optimistic to me as I imagine there are all kinds of things that could delay things. Unforseen circumstances lead to even the most sophisticated and experienced companies pushing back product launch dates, so it would not be at all surprising to see that happen in this case.

  • E Freitag

    Proposed price question. What reasons will Rossi explain us towards the end of the year that this year we will see no working E-cat?

    • LarryJ

      A working E-cat on the market will happen sooner or later and 40% of the key issues resolved 25% of the way through the year makes 2018 sound like as good a year as any.

      • Karl Venter

        “A good a year as any”? Maybe not the best comment to attach to Rossi as the years have crept past us with a lot of hope in many hearts for many years now.
        and yes I would like Rossi to succeed for his sake and the world sake but if you are 40 % to industrialization and you are still so secretive with your product( that you patented) its going to be a hard slog to get it accepted by the mainstream.
        When he has done 100 % industrialization will he then let independent evaluation take place? I hope so otherwise it will be said its much like the IH affair.(” I’m running a 1 MW plant but you cant look at it”)

        • LarryJ

          The whole point of massive industrialization is to let anyone buy it that wants one and with his new “It can’t be reverse engineered” strategy it would seem unlikely that Rossi would require 10s of thousands of customers to sign NDAs. If someone meets the requirements of an industrial user then they will be able to buy it and use it or evaluate it as they wish. He has said on his blog that he hopes some customer will demonstrate the reactor but that it’s up to the customer. The customers may want to keep this competitive advantage quiet for as long as they can.

          The 1MW year long test was an in house test of a prototype industrial reactor whose purpose was to validate the contract of the ecat IP sale between Leonardo and Industrial Heat. Although it was of great interest to the peanut gallery it was never intended to prove anything to anyone except Industrial Heat. They said they weren’t convinced, were sued for breach of contract by Leonardo and because the ERV was convinced it worked IH agreed to relinquish all rights to the ecat which has resulted in an explosion of activity ever since.

          • Karl Venter

            He is preparing for massive industrialisation ( I presume that means massive production of units with robots )
            He needs a massive market ?
            We here are aware of the benefits but big industrials are not and will be very sceptical of a new product – its just the way it is with new products people resist change
            Walking into a CEO office and say you going to save him millions with LENR is not a easy sell
            Yes there will be takers who have followed this
            Will that be enough to take up his industrialization output ?
            I have to say if I had a world changing product you would see me shouting it from the tallest building – hey but thats me
            It does not matter how good your NEW product is you need marketing and marketing.
            I am keen to see his unit tested then I too can shout from the building but I have in the past about his technology and had to swallow my words after the IH disaster
            I am curious how many units a month would Rossi be able to make/produce with the massive industrialization?
            Please dont get me wrong
            I want Rossi to succeed and all the other people too and as soon as MFMP say you need to do this and this to get it working easily I will be the first lazy person to attempt it.
            Go Rossi !!
            Go MFMP !!
            Go me365 !!
            Go japanese !!
            Go russians !!( but not Putin )
            Go everybody in LENR ( who did I miss out)
            You are going to get it right and change the world for the better

          • LarryJ

            You cannot mass market a device that nobody is sure is real and for very good reasons Rossi does not want to prove it is real until he has product on the shelf. To do so would give his enemies a rallying point, might provide information to his competitors and would definitely bring a huge worldwide focus on him which could be very disruptive to his efforts. He is much better staying below the radar until he can say “Yes it is real, buy it, try it and if you don’t like it we’ll give you your money back”.

            The market for heat is so massive that if his device works as we believe it does he should have no trouble at all selling the production from his first two factories. I personally believe that the production of these devices will not be that complicated, much like making light bulbs or batteries and once the demand starts to ramp up he can start to replicate his production facilities pretty quickly but it will require a massive injection of cash. That is why he has said he will take Leonardo public as soon as his reactors are a proven product. Not everyone will want to change over immediately because customers with new conventional plants could well see a fall in the price of fossil fuels which would make their current systems viable for some time to come. This will result in a steady and orderly but rising and massive changeover into the new tech. As Rossi says, his tech will integrate with the existing techs.

          • Dr. Mike

            The lack of marketing does seem to be a big concern for someone who claims the key to their success will be “massive production”. Would anyone buy more than one unit for testing until reliability data is available?

          • Frank Acland

            I don’t think we’ll see any marketing push until they have finished products that they as satisfied with and that are ready for sale. As Rossi would say, doing marketing now would be ‘premature’.

          • Dr. Mike

            I believe that you are correct that there will be no marketing effort before the end of the year or maybe well into next year. However, does this make good business sense if one wants to get to “massive production”? Contrast Rossi’s “no marketing” approach to Mills’ marketing approach for the SunCell. Mills released preliminary specs and rental prices and began lining up users to evaluate prototype SunCells long before he missed his scheduled milestones to deliver the first prototype. I believe potential customers would rather see the confidence of Mills (even if he is late on delivery) rather than Rossi’s “let’s see if we can make it work, then we will begin marketing”. Preliminary specs, even if these are just goals, should be available now if prototypes will be available by the end of 2018. One interpretation of Rossi’s lack of marketing in this stage of development might be that he doesn’t have confidence in getting a marketable system completed by the end of the year. Perhaps Rossi thinks the first couple of years of production will be bought by his major investment partner, and therefore no marketing is currently needed?

          • Frank Acland

            My best guess, based on Rossi’s comments, is we won’t see specs until the first presentation of a commercial plant. Even if he did release specs, I doubt potential customers would take them seriously until they felt sure he had something worth buying.

          • US_Citizen71

            Ask yourself one question, do you think the guy who discovered fire needed a lot of marketing. If he takes it to production a demo or two of a production model will likely be all he needs to get it in the media and on everyone’s lips. Future headline/soundbyte – ‘Remember Cold Fusion? It works and it is for sale!’ – Hopefully!

          • Dr. Mike

            I don’t think a Rossi demonstration will do the job. However, good results from an independent test of a prototype with Rossi not any part of that test would probably be sufficient to get marketing going. Hopefully!

    • LilyLover

      I was offended by EF, therefore cats and dogs will not see freedom of the rest of humanity. Is that what you expect? 8 months or 18 months, not much difference for how the World will change. Holding Rossi to arbitrary deadlines will be counterproductive. He will do what he will. He’s good. Leave it, seriously.

    • Dr. Mike

      This is certainly an interesting question. However, perhaps a better question would be: what really will be the problem(s) that causes the first E-Cat product not to be introduced in 2018? Does anyone believe Rossi will inform the public what his problems are when he declined in the above answer to discuss any of his possible current “issues”?

  • Ophelia Rump

    Can we assume the industrialization began this year?

    If that is correct; then the first commercial LENR product is currently on a trajectory toward third quarter release.

  • Frank Acland

    Tom Conover: What do you suppose the probability of manufacturing by the end of 2018 is now? About a month ago, you were thinking about 80-90%.

    Andrea Rossi
    March 27, 2018 at 10:34 AM
    Tom Conover:
    Very interesting, thank you!
    My odds remain unchanged, so far.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Very few inventions can be industrialized and put on the market in a year. Such claims are hard to believe.
    So here’s my interpretation:
    If Rossi really has come as far as he says, it’s probably because he has found the very essential principle for making his LENR based reactor work, and that once you have found this principle, the physical design of the reactor turns out not to be very complicated, albeit difficult to devise. At that point, the industrialization process could be as trivial as for any simple small gadget with only a few parts, maybe with the only exception that some details or structures might need an exceptional level of manufacturing precision. That would make the short time frame credible.
    His claims that he has found a way to make reverse engineering impossible could then possibly be explained by some crucial microscopic geometry which might be self-destructing under certain conditions.
    Time will tell.

    • psi2u2

      Mats, very interesting as always to hear your take on what is or might be happening.

    • Engineer48

      Hi Mats,

      Of course reverse engineering of anything is possible, even when the device is rigged to explode if taken apart.

      • I agree in principle Eng48. My thought was that what’s most difficult to reproduce efter disintegration are detailed/microscopic structures and geometries, whereas e.g. the chemical and isotopic composition essentially remains and can be analysed.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Mats,

          We both know Andrea knows his reactors will be replicated much faster than he shares.

          Using explosive charges will make certification impossible. Ie who will buy a reactor that can explode?

          Reverse engineering will happen.

          • roseland67

            48

            As I have been saying since 2011.

            An invention of this kind simply cannot be kept secret,
            so the IP issue is moot.
            Companies, countries and nation states will reverse engineer it, change it sufficiently enough to get around the patents,
            and make it their own.

            Now, all we need to find out is
            Energy Out > Energy In?
            After 7 years, sadly, still unknown.

          • Engineer48

            Hi Roselands,

            We know the US Navy Spawar codeposition LENR tech works and works very well.

            Now it seems they are open to license that tech and do cooperative research. So something happened to cause them to “surface” their LENR tech.

            Maybe Rossi is that something?

          • Omega Z

            DARPA developed a microchip that destructed it’s secrets when dissected. It took about 5 years, but someone, likely tasked with this intentionally by DARPA figured out a way to disassemble it without it destructing. Everything is possible with enough time and money. However, the real goal is buying time while one makes additional advances.

            Rossi knows he is merely buying time. So possibly someone obtains an E-cat and reverse engineers and partially understands it in about 2 years. Another 2 years to create their own technology IP. Rossi wont be idle in this time period. As soon as sales start, he will greatly increase his R&D team and be advancing the technology staying ahead of competitors.

            Note: Ever wonder why Coke/KFC etc lock up their secret recipes in vaults. With today’s technology and the products freely available, it would not be hard to replicate their trade secrets in short order. As long as Coke/KFC etc take certain reasonable legal steps, it has the same legal protection as patent IP’s with the exception- It has no expiration date.

            So, should someone find Rossi’s trade secret, (secret sauce/formula/recipe) when reverse engineering his E-cat, they are not allowed to use/exploit or disseminate that information. It has the same protections as all IP’s.

            Technically, Reverse Engineering is illegal…

        • Tim Reese

          So why is Rossi so concerned about reverse engineering? It will happen eventually, but he will already be a billionaire…Why so concerned? That’s the job for lawyers… Honestly, Rossi is coming across as rather strange in this regard. He cannot control everything…He will still get full credit and money will not be an issue…All he needs to do is be the first one to present a working prototype to the public…the rest will follow… at some point secrecy can actually be counterproductive…

        • Axil Axil

          The way that Rossi protects his IP is to generate the LERN reaction in a plasma. In this way, there is no residual geometries: e.g. the chemical and isotopic composition essentially is masked by the formation of plasma and there exists no remains to be analysed.

      • Roland

        A little blue skying for your consideration:

        The apparatus has a particular set of initial conditions, the reaction is initiated by lowering the reaction threshold with precise resonant frequencies, the onset of the reaction changes aspects of the original conditions in a fashion analogous to a single ended transform from which the initial conditions cannot be inferred.

        Lessor devices can be accomplished with what can be reverse engineered from the commercial design but they can not compete in cost and/or performance, there by preserving economic advantage rather than shielding all aspects of the IP.

  • Dr. Mike

    Frank continues to ask the best questions of Rossi. Finally, Rossi has answered a good question honestly: “But many other issues remain and I want not to disclose them.” It is surely a fact that there are many issues that could derail an introduction of the initial commercial product, but in my opinion the most important issue is that there is not time to properly address reliability of the final product by the end of the year (and perhaps even by the end of 2019). How many engineering problems not even related to reliability will come up when Rossi attempts to turn a system designed on paper to real product?

    • sam

      Frank asks good questions and you have interesting
      comments Dr Mike.

  • Dr. Mike

    A very good question. The only way any answer would have been meaningful would have required Rossi to have put out a development schedule with dates for key milestones, then answer as to whether the milestones were being met by the target dates.

  • Yes ebevogon, that is the simplest interpretation of all.

    • Karl Venter

      Hi Mats

      Are you allowed to tell us if you have seen the new ecat?

      • The E-Cat QX?

        • Karl Venter

          Yes and any other lately…….?

          • I have seen the QX that also Frank has seen, so I don’t have any other information than what Frank has already reported. I haven’t seen any later models.

          • Karl Venter

            Thanks Matt
            When’s the next Book coming out?

          • 😉 There will be a third edition if and when Rossi or someone else presents a commercially viable product.
            I also have a plan for a follow-up book but it’s not time to start writing it yet.

          • Skip

            Can’t wait!
            Reminder: Please make the cover different from V1 or V2 so I can keep the digital copies separate.
            Thanx Mats

  • Val K

    40% completed?

    According to the Pareto principle, completion of the first 80% of a project requires 20% of time and efforts. Rest 20% of the project require 80% of time and efforts. Let’s see, how it works in Rossi’s case

  • MikeP

    It’s general procedure to create X number of a production prototype using the exact methods to be used in mass production. Then test to make sure there are no errors in specification or manufacturing. Only when this process is successful does a product go into mass production. I haven’t seen anybody ask Rossi about the creation of or testing of production prototypes – I assume this must be underway if he is serious about having something to present this year. That’s how you learn about inadequate specs, mis-read specs, or deficient production process.

    • Dr. Mike

      You are certainly correct that testing of production line prototypes should be a critical part of an overall production plan before moving to large volume production. It might be fair to assume that when Rossi says he will start commercial production in 2018, he really means that the first production line prototypes will be built by the end of 2018. (There haven’t been any claims for “massive production” by the end of 2018 for some time.) I would consider it a great success if just one prototype could be built on the automated production line in 2018. However, I haven’t seen enough information from Rossi to make me believe that he will have even the first production line product prototype completed in 2018. To meet a end of 2018 goal for production line prototypes, I would have expected to see preliminary specs from a hand built prototype by this time.

      • Omega Z

        Rossi stated product by 2018 or 2019, but hoping for by end of 2018. He has until midnight December 31st to make 2018, but if not, he still has 2019 before being beyond his stated goals.

        As to product specs. Any numbers at this time would be useless. Manufacturing results seldom match R&D product. Specs may be better or worse then expected results. Until a product comes from the end of the assembly line, no specs can be confirmed.

        I could probably come up with a dozen products whose specs changed due to manufacturing technology issues. Currently when people ask Rossi questions about the current specs available on the E-cat website, he says actual specs will be available when the product is actually being manufactured. Not before.

        • Dr. Mike

          I believe Rossi originally said end of 2018 in an interview (or on his blog) shortly after the demonstration. Perhaps he now is adding another year? Other than you, nobody has been talking about 2019.
          If specs won’t be available until the product is manufactured, potential customers will not be able to consider designing E-cats into their own systems until then. This still doesn’t seem like a good marketing strategy for someone trying to reach massive production. Without a strong marketing group already working, what chance does Rossi have that his configuration of an initial product will be something that can be readily adapted to potential customer’s needs? How many customers did Rossi have for his original plant, which Rossi claimed had a 1MW output? The answer is: so few that he had to invent a sham customer!

          • LarryJ

            I assume the “original” reactor’s sham customer you are referring to was for the 1MW test reactor that ran for 1 year in Doral Florida. That was a prototype industrial reactor whose sole purpose was to ratify the contract between Industrial Heat and Leonardo for sale of the ecat IP to IH. That reactor was never intended for sale and Rossi had to babysit it 24/7 to get the fantastic results he did. The validity of the customer was never tested in court as IH agreed to an out of court settlement after the opening arguments on the first day of court. They subsequently relinquished all rights to the ecat, probably because the Expert Responsible for Validation (ERV) agreed to by both parties said the test was a complete success and IH owed Leonardo $89 million. Your comment about a sham customer is pure conjecture as you will never know what Rossi would have argued in court.

            It is hard to know whether or not Rossi has a marketing team in place or not but what is known is that you cannot market a device that most of the world does not believe is real until you have product on the shelf.

            As I understand it the first reactors will be relatively simple affairs that will produce heat for industrial customers who need steam. There will be no attempt on the first go to produce custom reactors for OEM manufacturers who wish to incorporate his tech into their products. The specs for connecting his reactor to a customers existing heat exchanger should not be that complicated and are probably already available.

          • Dr. Mike

            As “frank” below states the sham customer was indeed Rossi himself. I agree with “frank” that you must not have read the court depositions. The depositions contain just about everything that would have been presented to the jury so we actually do know what both sides would have argued in court.
            As for your claim “you cannot market a device that most of the world does not believe is real until you have product on the shelf”, Mills is certainly actively marketing his SunCell long before a prototype is “on the shelf”. Your opinion may be that this is not a good strategy for Mills, but my opinion is that this is a better strategy that Rossi’s.
            While there are certainly lots of potential customers that could use high temperature, high pressure steam, will Rossi’s initial product be able to deliver this type of steam? I guess by the end of 2018 we will find out if Rossi’s initial product is something that can be used by a lot of customers so that Rossi can quickly move to “massive production”.

          • LarryJ

            As you point out depositions show just about everything but not everything, otherwise the judge could simply rule on the depositions as you have.

            Mills is marketing to investors not customers.

          • Dr. Mike

            A jury would have decided the case based on both the testimony and evidence presented during the trial, which would include a repeat of a portion of the deposition testimony and the evidence allowed by the judge. The judge(s) actually did make many rulings based on the depositions, especially what evidence and testimony would have been allowed to be presented by each side during the trial. What the judge would not have allowed is new testimony that was not covered in the depositions, except for certain instances, such as, new evidence or claims made after a person had finished their depositions. An example would be: there was no mention of a heat exchanger by anyone that had been deposed until after Mr. Smith’s report (1-30-17) claimed the building would have overheated because the sham customer was not really using any heat (as supported by deposition testimony). Finally in a 2-10-17 deposition, Rossi claimed there was a heat exchanger to eliminate the excess heat. In the deposition of the the radiation inspector on 12-15-16, James Stokes testified that he completely inspected the facility, including even the offices, and opened up the black box that was claimed to be where the “customer” was using the heat. Stokes made no mention of inspecting a heat exchanger (because the phantom heat exchanger had yet been invented). Stokes would have been allowed to testify at the trial that he saw no pipes going to the mezzanine, and no heat exchanger in the mezzanine, which he would have surely opened up to inspect like he did the customer “black box”. Likewise, Bass, Penon, Fabiani, West, and even the janitor Breto could have been questioned at the trial as to whether they saw the phantom heat exchanger.

          • Omega Z

            No, Rossi said from the beginning 2018 or 2019, but his focus was to try and have a product in use by the end of 2018. It is the blogs that focus on 2018 and not talking of 2019 with few exceptions.

            This is actually not good as should Rossi Not make it by the end of this year, many of the detractors will say told you so and a slid to 2019 will be treated in a similar fashion from day one.

        • causal observer

          It would be interesting to find a comparable product and associated manufacturing line that was designed entirely with CAD/CAM, and see how well they did. The Dreamliner might not be the best example…

          https://www.autodesk.com/solutions/cad-cam

    • Ophelia Rump

      I think you need 100 % of the production method in place before such a test would be valid.
      That would be a good question for Q3 of this year.

  • Dr. Mike

    All of these would be on my list for basic milestones.

  • Richard Hill

    Since the physical size of the QX is so small, the high volume plant need not be enormous. A moulded plastic part the size of a QX could be made in a plant 10 x 10 meters. A glass bottle making plant making an enormous volume of QX sized units need only be 10 x 30 meters with furnaces and moulding machines. The Isaelis made high volumes of weapons in secret underground plants,employing dozens of people, which were only a few square meters in size in the 1940’s. Good luck in locating the QX plant!

  • Alan DeAngelis

    It will take some time to set everything into place (like the movable type of the first printing press) but once that is done the world will change faster than it ever did before.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=191&v=OkfiT7p_1GA

  • LarryJ

    He says he has a site in Florida now but not yet in Sweden. He will not tip his hand until he is ready and nobody but us really cares anyway. The biggest secrets are the easiest to keep because everybody is totally incredulous and could care less about his new toy because they know it is not real. If you have tried to tell anyone about this tech you will know what I am talking about.

  • Rene

    https://media.giphy.com/media/e1F9EDv5qZWjC/giphy.gif

    I’d treat that answer as 40% chance production happens this year.

  • Richard Hill

    Frank, you are right of course. I was only thinking about the QX itself. All the rest of the product is a different picture.
    As a former production engineer I agree that any plant producing complete units anything like the Industrial Heat project device in volume would be enormous. All those pumps and pipes, if the final shipping product is about the size of a car, the experience of Tesla Autos is relevant. They have found it difficult to ramp up production.
    Re. the controller. We are continually harassed by Chinese manuf. who say they can produce high volumes of electronic devices at short notice. This assumes the controller is just a circuit board in a box. The intellectual property of the controller could be embedded in one chip, which again can be volume produced by a contract foundry. The lead time for chip development is months or years.
    The concept of high volume production in the near future is hard to believe.
    If I was advising Rossi I would recommend the opposite. Go for low volume production for selected markets. Charge a high price. How about the diamond mines in the Canadian Arctic?
    They must be spending a fortune on fuel. It is easy to think of similar opportunities.

  • sam

    Frank Acland
    March 28, 2018 at 5:24 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    Being 40 per cent of the way to industrialization at this point in the year is quite encouraging in terms of meeting your goal for a presentation in 2018, however only if you continue at the current rate.

    At this point, is your work becoming easier, or getting harder?

    Best wishes,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi
    March 28, 2018 at 7:28 PM
    Frank Acland:
    In these very days we have resolved many problems that, theoretically, should make easier to succeed, but, you know, we are cutting our path through an unexplored territory.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Lotto

    Since the physical size of the QX is so small, the high volume plant need not be enormous. A moulded plastic part the size of a QX could be made in a plant 10 x 10 meters. A glass bottle making plant making an enormous volume of QX sized units need only be 10 x 30 meters with furnaces and moulding machines

  • Bob Matulis

    My gut says A.R. saying 40% translates to years if ever. He can be optimistic.

  • cashmemorz

    I came across a commenter on Quora, claiming that Florida Power had gotten the state to put in place a law to prevent the use of competing sources of power, in particular solar cells. A similar kind of road block to altermative power generation by individuals has hit me personally. On old electric power bills the usual break down of the items paid for was 90% for electric power, and 5-10% for water and sewage service combined. This was all on one bill. Now that the electric power costs wen through the roof, from sale of the government owned and managed power utility(Hydro One) complaints have reduced those power bill amounts somewhat, but not enough. So finally, the bill currently shows that power share of the bill is 25% and the rest, 75% is water plus sewage. This compares to previously the power amount of the bill around $100 and the water/sewage was $20. Now the power costs $85 and the water/Sewage $200. Tricky dickies. There is no way I am able to use that much less eletricity and even less likely that I am using that much more water, even if I tried. Complaining to the city, that in the end is who supplies the water is an uphill battle. It seems that however the costs and payment of electricity is being managed, it is all in favor of the entranched utility. From my view of the direction that the LENR and similar threats presented to power utilities, it has been now pre-emptively taken care of, by either blocking use of competitors probably including future users of LENR devices at home, by force of law in someplaces, such as Florida, and by managing the power bill structure in other places like Ontario, Canada.

    It seems that there is no way that the government and the utilities will allow the curent paradigm, or way of doing things from being disrupted. Rossi’s device will not be used by developed countries except where and how the government sees fit. In underdeveopled plaes it may be easier to sell or use LENr or Suncells or the like.

  • Buck

    In the following exchange, Rossi seems to say that the manufacturing specifications for the Ecat QX module are nearing finalization or final sign-off. IMO, a very important step. It makes me wonder what other manufacturing specifications are next . . . software programming of the robots?

    =======================================
    Frank Acland
    March 29, 2018 at 12:43 PM

    Dear Andrea,
    I understand about not giving specific details, but can we assume you have made improvements in the E-Cat QX recently?

    Thank you very much,

    Frank Acland
    _________________________________________

    Andrea Rossi
    March 29, 2018 at 1:09 PM

    Frank Acland:

    Enormous. Exponential for what concerns the development of a module industrializable and the industrialization itself. Now our module is
    very close to be ready to be reproduced massively.

    Warm Regards

    A.R.

    • Dr. Mike

      We do know that Rossi had previously announced that he had increased the output power of the QX devices from 20W to 80W. The real question is: are these “improvements” going to help or hinder getting a commercial product out by the end of 2018? It seems that every change, including “enormous improvements”, to the QX device means resetting reliability testing back fairly close to zero.
      Also note that Rossi continues to answer questions about the QX device by talking about the “module”. Does each QX device require other components to form a module or does module refer to a group of QX devices?

      • Buck

        In the following exchange between Frank and Andrea, a perspective is painted. Rossi, the person in the position to know, implies that his expanded team has made real dramatic improvements in the QX module, which I take to mean the singlet reactor(s) and the associated control module. Given Rossi’s experience over the years, I take this as the foundation of his judgement. His guarded optimism engenders my optimism.

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

        Frank Acland
        March 28, 2018 at 5:24 PM

        Dear Andrea,

        Being 40 per cent of the way to industrialization at this point in the year is quite encouraging in terms of meeting your goal for a presentation in 2018, however only if you continue at the current rate.

        At this point, is your work becoming easier, or getting harder?

        Best wishes,

        Frank Acland
        ________________________________________

        Andrea Rossi
        March 28, 2018 at 7:28 PM

        Frank Acland:

        In these very days we have resolved many problems that, theoretically, should make easier to succeed, but, you know, we are cutting our path through an unexplored territory.

        Warm Regards,

        A.R.

  • Pekka Janhunen

    Exactly so.

  • sam

    DT
    March 30, 2018 at 1:18 AM
    Dr Andrea Rossi,
    How much of the production of an Ecat will be made manually and how much by robots, in percentage?
    Happy Easter to you, your team and the readers of this blog,
    DT

    Andrea Rossi
    March 30, 2018 at 9:01 AM
    DT:
    manually 20%
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    Gerard McEk
    March 30, 2018 at 4:25 AM
    Dear Andrea,
    Your last answer to Frank Ackland sounds very optimistic, some questions if I may:
    1. Have you already produced a QX automatically?
    2. Have you tested this device and did it work?
    3. Do you intent to produce also the control system yourself?

    Thank you and kind regards, Gerard

    Andrea Rossi

    March 30, 2018 at 8:58 AM
    Gerard McEk:
    1- no
    2- n.a.
    3- yes
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    • Obvious

      At least DT did not sign off with Warm Regards, AR this time.

  • cashmemorz

    When I pay my bills, I should not have to understand stuff like that. It makes me wonder what the hell is going on. Obfuscation or complication or something else again?

  • sam

    Frank Acland
    March 30, 2018 at 10:21 AM

    Dear Andrea,
    Very interesting to learn of your ‘enormous’ improvements. Some questions if I may:

    1. Has your testing of the large E-Cat SK reactors helped you improve the E-Cat QX?

    2. I would assume it is critical for you to get everything fully
    prepared and planned before you start trying robotic production. Is this
    what you are doing at the moment?

    3. When you are ready to start production, will you start small, in order to ensure the system is working well?

    4. What is the likelihood now of production starting in 2018?

    5. What is the likelihood now of the product presentation in 2018?

    Thank you,

    Frank Acland

    Andrea Rossi

    March 30, 2018 at 11:08 AM

    Frank Acland:

    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- yes
    4- stable
    5- stable

    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • LarryJ

    I did read the depositions but until an argument is presented in court you do not really know what might come out of testimony. Otherwise the judge could simply rule based on the depositions as you have done.

    • Dr. Mike

      How many days did you spend “reading the depositions”, because it really would have taken several days just to read the depositions. If you did read the depositions and all of the other written evidence that both sides submitted, you might have concluded as I did that Rossi’s credibility would be destroyed by the IH lawyers in an actual trial. Rossi’s deposition testimony was not consistent with other available evidence (such as e-mails). (This is not to say that IH would have not also came out looking bad in the trial for their failure to supervise and verify Rossi’s Work.)

      • LarryJ

        I read most of depositions. I enjoy the luxury of time. I also read the settlement agreement. IH relinquished the licences for North America, Central America, South America, Russia, China, the ecat IP, the 1MW prototype reactor they built and owned and Rossi kept the $11 million down payment. Tom Darden left the courtroom with the lint in his pockets. So much for IHs crackerjack legal team dedtroying Rossi’s credibility. To win that case they knew they had to destroy Penon’s (the ERVs) cedibility and they knew that was a huge uphill battle.

        • Dr. Mike

          Rossi destroyed hid own credibility. Perhaps you missed the testimony from the depositions that Penon wrote his report based on data that was taken by Fabiani, when he thought that Fabiani was sending him data from his (Penon’s) computers. Fabiani claimed in his deposition testimony that he couldn’t access Penon’s computer data, so he just sent his own data. Was Penon’s report really independent?

          • LarryJ

            I did read that and you’re grasping at straws. If Darden’s legal team thought they had a case they would have tried it. Instead Darden handed over the crown jewel in his lenr portfolio that was bringing in many tens of millions of dollars because he knew he risked it all if he tried to hold onto it. Darden’s lawyers were not the dummies you are implying.

          • Dr. Mike

            Although we know what was said in the depositions, we know nothing that the lawyers for either side were thinking. However, too much time had passed for IH to recover the original $10M. IH pursuing their law suit further was a no-win situation. A jury could have ruled at the end of a trial that IH retained rights to Rossi’s technology, but those rights would be worth nothing because Rossi did not transfer his technology to them as the contract required. It does seem to make sense that the a settlement without a trial was the only economic solution that IH could make to avoid the legal fees that would have accumulated during a trial.

          • LarryJ

            If Rossi has what he says he has and each passing day makes that likelihood stronger, then the licences IH held and forfeited by breach of contract would have been worth billions because Rossi could not sell the ecat into those areas (most of the world) without being seriously challenged. Those licences and the IP are why we saw nothing from Rossi for the period during which IH held them.

            Rossi won everything he needed and wanted from the lawsuit because he did his homework and his position was unassailable. The Darden legal team knew it and wisely withdrew. Now with IH gone for good, Rossi is free to move and he is moving fast. His credibility may not be strong with you but it is very strong with the people who count, the ones whose engineers have actually played with his reactors and that is all that matters.

  • Axil Axil

    The QX reactor is based on the design of the HID bulb. The QX uses viable light instead of heat as a LENR stimulus.

    https://coolbulbs.com/media/wysiwyg/diagram.jpg

    See

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUefaasi4yg

  • Axil Axil

    Rossi has stated that the Lugano “hot Cat” test inspired him to create the QX reactor. Looking back o this history, it is now obvious what Rossi saw in the Lugano test that inspired the design of the QX.

    Frank Acland
    June 25th, 2015 at 11:13 PM
    Dear Andrea,

    You wrote:

    “The MW E-Cat is in ssm and stable.
    The Hot Cat is in ssm too, stable.”

    Is this unusual or quite normal these days?

    Kind regards,

    Frank

    Andrea Rossi
    June 27th, 2015 at 8:13 AM
    Frank Acland:
    Good question, impossible answer: to explain what has been the source of important factors emerged from the Lugano Report I should have to disclose confidential particulars. The huge work we made in our lab before the Lugano Report is the base that allowed us to see in the Report what can be observed only if you have “eyes” for it, trained by the huge background I mentioned.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R,

    Notice the phase …if you have “eyes”…

    Rossi saw something in the Hot Cat during the Lugano test that changed the direction of Rossi’s reactor development efforts that lead to the QX reactor; something that you can see with your eyes.

    The Lugano reactor produced light inside the core that back lit the heater wires. This LENR generated light was strong enough to outshine the heater wires even through those wires were operating at 1400C. This implies that LENR can produce light at 1 EV as Rossi has lately confirmed. That temperature does not change with the power output of the reactor. Rossi has quoted the same heat temperature multiple times even when the QX reactor cluster was only operating at just 30% of minimum power.

    During his R&D in the computer container Rossi decided to push the Hot Cat operating temperature higher and higher, With each temperature increase Rossi saw better COP, more light production and longer self sustain mode performance.

    Rossi eventually realized that visible light could pump the LENR reaction since heat production was fixed. What improved was the amour of input power that drove the reaction. Less and Less input produced the same amount of heat as the operating temperature when up.

    Rossi eventually implemented the light generation mechanism of the HID light. That mechanism was what we saw depicted on the oscilloscope during the last QX demo..

    • Buck

      I believe you will appreciate the following exchange given your focus upon the importance of light. I capitalize for emphasis.

      ==============================================
      Raffaele Bongo
      April 2, 2018 at 10:50 AM

      Hello A. Rossi

      I understand that your technology is evolving exponentially. It is difficult for you to imagine today what will be the definitive characteristics of the E-Cat 1 MW. There is still a trend that is emerging. It was probably less bulky and lighter.

      Do you have an idea of ​​the shielding weight / total weight ratio and the power per unit mass and volume of the E-Cat boiler?

      Tough wishes for success and all the best for your team

      Your support Raffaele
      ______________________________________________

      Andrea Rossi
      April 2, 2018 at 1:31 PM

      Raffaele Bongo:

      IN OUR CASE THE SHIELDING IS LIGHT, because we do not use radioactive materials and our radiations are not ionizing, due to the low energy inside our Ecat.

      In all the experiments we made ( tens of thousand hours now, with me as the Guinea pig ), we never found ionizing radiations exit the Ecats.

      Warm Regards,

      A.R.

  • Buck

    What do you think would result if Rossi modified his arc style reactor so that the anode was spherical as in the SAFIRE apparatus?

    • Axil Axil

      The control mechanisms are different. Rossi uses an initial arch discharge to produce a plasma, then an RF signal to produce light. Rossi also uses “fuel” to produce his reaction.

      Safire uses a balance of DC current and hydrogen gas pressure to produce the double layers. These layers are not plasma. Safire does not use fuel. The LENR reaction just happens in the double layer.

      Mixing the two: SAFIRE and the QX, just won’t work.

  • sam

    Harvey
    April 19, 2018 at 10:52 AM
    Dear Andrea,
    While I recognize that your efforts are predominately focused on the Ecat QX development to achieve first production in this year. However, there are undoubtedly many other issues requiring your attention to achieve this goal. If it is not confidential, can you please advise on the progress in the development of the US manufacturing facility?
    1. Has physical work commenced on the construction and installation of manufacturing equipment?
    2. Do you feel that the US plant will be able to perform a pre-production run by the end of the third quarter of this year?
    3. What do you consider to be the most significant obstacle in getting the plant on line this year?
    4. Are you able to disclose the state in which the plant is located?
    5. What is the planned annual production capacity after the plant is fully on line?
    6. Will this plant be used only for US markets or will it also ship to global clients?
    I hope you are also able to find other domestic and international venues to satisfy the immense demands that already exist.
    Thanks for the intensely hard work by you and all of your team.
    Harvey

    Andrea Rossi
    April 19, 2018 at 11:28 AM
    Harvey:
    1- not yet
    2- no
    3- unforseen obstacles ( “dark obstacles” )
    4- no
    5- n.a.
    6- will also ship abroad
    Thank you for your attention to our work
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.