I’m very happy to be able to have another guest post today — this one written by Dr. Johannes Hagel, of Neuss, Germany.
Being a physicist I consider the announced test of Andrea Rossis E-Cat at Uppsala as one of the most important of all the series of tests we have been seen so far. This for the following reason:
In the announced test for the first time there will be made use of a heat exchanger which transfers the energy of the steam output into a secondary circuit for heating water without boiling it. At least that is how I understood it from Rossi’s description. This means that a certain amount of water per time unit will pass through the heat exchanger with a given entrance temperature T1 and a larger exit temperature T2.
It is then very simple to compute the amount of energy which has been necessary to obtain this temperature difference at a given water flow through the exchanger (in fact a simple multiplication of three numbers). In addition, this energy measured will give an “approximation from below” to the true energy output of the E-Cat. This is because a heat exchanger, due to the laws of thermodynamics (as well as to non-perfect insulation) will never reach 100% efficiency.
However, with this method we will be sure that at least the measured energy in the secondary circuit has indeed be released by the E-Cat. This was not so easy to state using the old method of temperature measurement of the direct steam output as it has been done so far. This is due to a difficulty of distinguishing between wet and dry steam, wet steam still containing some water in it. This remaining water has not been vaporized, i.e. the vaporization energy necessary to transfer water to steam (phase change!) has never been applied to it. Hence the thus computed energy output can easily be overestimated. If however, one transfers all the energy of the steam (dry or wet) via the heat exchanger, and uses it for heating water without boiling it things become very clear.
Of course the upcoming test has to be run for a sufficient amount of time to exclude a chemical process inside the E-Cat which could account for the observed energy output. As far as I understood the present E-Cat is considerably larger than the previous one. For the original one Prof. Levi (University of Bologna) excluded a combustion process after a test run of 18 hours. From the images shown I would guess that the inside volume now is at least three times the one before and thus the test should be extended for at least 60 hours or even more to exclude common energy sources inside.
However if all this is observed and any type of “hidden energy transfer” from the outside into the E-Cat (e.g. based on micro waves etc.) can be excluded then I would consider this type of test as a very rigorous and would be extremely pleased seeing a positive result.
Dr. Johannes Hagel, Physicist
Neuss, Germany
