Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Rossi’s E-Cat Cold Fusion Reactor Validated by Third-Party Tests

page: 1
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 21 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Hello there and a good day to everybody


The topic of Rossi's E-cat reactor has been gone over a bunch of times here on ATS for a few years now, ad to be honest I forgot all about it after some time, so this came as a surprise to me. I found the below link by accident while browsing my daily news sites .

It seems from the article that, an independent test has been done by the Cornell University with apparent success .

Some quotes from the article :



Such a third party test has now been reported, in a paper dryly titled “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder”.





“Data were collected in two experimental runs lasting 96 and 116 hours, respectively,” with the first experiment demonstrating a COP (Coefficient of Performance) of almost 6, and a energy density estimated at five orders of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources. This means an energy production (per liter) one order of magnitude higher than a conventional source.


Link to the full article

Since I am not an expert in any of those above topics I will refrain from my comments for now and see if somebody more knowledgeable might comment




posted on May, 21 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 


What an interesting development, I'm not a scientist either but to me it sounds promising.
Cant wait to see what our resident bill nyes say.

Its interesting that you posted this, I just read the quote in your sig. Very fitting.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 





Skeptic Quote -- "Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax." --William Thomson, Lord Kelvin English scientist, 1899.


Well that doesn't change the fact that, until Rossi, every single example of "cold fusion" was indeed a hoax. This is an interesting development. We'll know it's legit for sure when Rossi dies of a mysterious illness and the government buys up all his patents.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   
PDF download of paper

This looks so cool (no pun). I wish I could understand what I just read!



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


Unfortunately, I believe you're correct which makes my blood boil. To my way of seeing things, if this cold fusion were a go, I can think of too many reasons it would never see production



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Well, this just means there is evidence to substantiate that the device is real. It was real all the time, why wasn't this tested three years ago.....Because they were evaluating how it will effect the economy probably. I suppose the government can tax the fuel, the fuel can be controlled. I suppose the fuel will also be costly and only be available through authorized dealerships.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   
So many people have been repeatedly saying the inventor is a hoaxer out to make money but right from the start i've always said "how could he ever hope to get away with any cash if its not real?".

So far all the tests seems to back up the claims. I have my fingers crossed for this invention.

An experimental investigation of possible anomalous heat production in a special type of reactor tube named E-Cat HT is carried out. The reactor tube is charged with a small amount of hydrogen loaded nickel powder plus some additives. The reaction is primarily initiated by heat from resistor coils inside the reactor tube. Measurement of the produced heat was performed with high-resolution thermal imaging cameras, recording data every second from the hot reactor tube. The measurements of electrical power input were performed with a large bandwidth three-phase power analyzer. Data were collected in two experimental runs lasting 96 and 116 hours, respectively. An anomalous heat production was indicated in both experiments. The 116-hour experiment also included a calibration of the experimental set-up without the active charge present in the E-Cat HT. In this case, no extra heat was generated beyond the expected heat from the electric input. Computed volumetric and gravimetric energy densities were found to be far above those of any known chemical source. Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 


I was so stoked when I got the email about this. Unfortunately, I'm reluctant to ever discuss it here because people instantly feel the need to tell you how it's impossible.

What they don't realize is that everything we do was impossible until we did it.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
So many people have been repeatedly saying the inventor is a hoaxer out to make money but right from the start i've always said "how could he ever hope to get away with any cash if its not real?".

So far all the tests seems to back up the claims. I have my fingers crossed for this invention.

An experimental investigation of possible anomalous heat production in a special type of reactor tube named E-Cat HT is carried out. The reactor tube is charged with a small amount of hydrogen loaded nickel powder plus some additives. The reaction is primarily initiated by heat from resistor coils inside the reactor tube. Measurement of the produced heat was performed with high-resolution thermal imaging cameras, recording data every second from the hot reactor tube. The measurements of electrical power input were performed with a large bandwidth three-phase power analyzer. Data were collected in two experimental runs lasting 96 and 116 hours, respectively. An anomalous heat production was indicated in both experiments. The 116-hour experiment also included a calibration of the experimental set-up without the active charge present in the E-Cat HT. In this case, no extra heat was generated beyond the expected heat from the electric input. Computed volumetric and gravimetric energy densities were found to be far above those of any known chemical source. Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than conventional energy sources.




Hoaxes have a way of making money from Investors and speculators willing to believe that there is Zero Point energy. I am not saying that the E-Cat is a hoax but I am saying that anyone can make money off of investors hoping for the next big thing...

I also have been hoping this is the real deal but somehow I just cannot seem to fit it in the current power/money structure.

This would completely change the control of power companies, gas\oil companies and all of the middle men and end dealers.

But the Car, the personal computer have all been revolutionary as well so...maybe...



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 

I feel like I'm in a time warp going back to 2011 when the same professor Giuseppe Levi already confirmed it was a nuclear reaction:

April 06, 2011 Swedish Researchers confirm Rossi and Focardi Energy Catalyzer as a Nuclear Process


In a detailed report, two Swedish physicists exclude chemical reactions as the energy source in the Italian ‘energy catalyzer’. The two physicists recently supervised a new test of the device in Bologna, Italy.

Then what happened? Rossi said he had developed commercial generators.

So, 2 years later, I would have expected to see the commercial generator tested, meaning power generated out instead of just heat production which is where we were back in 2011.

Moreover, this is interesting:

Energy Catalyzer

Dick Smith offered Rossi one million dollars to demonstrate that the E-Cat system worked as claimed, while the power through the earth wire was also being measured, which Rossi refused.[50][51] Peter Thieberger, a senior physicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory, said it would be very difficult for this misconnection to happen by accident and that the issue could only be cleared with a fully independent test.

So was this latest test fully independent? Not fully.

A paper titled “Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device" was published on 16 May 2013. The authors of the paper noted that they weren’t in control of all of the aspects of the process

So despite the claim it was an independent test, the researchers weren't in control of all aspects of the process and notably I didn't notice where they made a special effort to measure current flowing though the ground wire which one would think might be very relevant after reading about Dick Smith's million-dollar offer.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Rossi could have LONG, LONG AGO proven to anyone and even to the last doubter that the device functions. He could've just built a small "demo" device, powering something simple - for anyone to see. Proof of concept, proof that the theory behind the device is sound.

He didn't do it.

Now ask yourself why.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Thank You for refreshing the history of the device, like I said I am on the fence on this one since it came to light back a few years ago. Also like stated before, I am in no way capable to analyse the pdf with the research paper to the extend to be able to state a intelligent argument. Have You read the pdf ? To a laymen's. The credentials of the people at the beginning of the paper seem rather good . The conclusion seems also rather interesting :




The two test measurements described in this text were conducted with the same methodology on two different devices: a first prototype, termed E-Cat HT, and a second one, resulting from technological improvements on the first, termed E-Cat HT2. Both have indicated heat production from an unknown reaction primed by heat from resistor coils. The results obtained indicate that energy was produced in decidedly higher quantities than what may be gained from any conventional source.

In the March test, about 62 net kWh were produced, with a consumption of about 33 kWh, a power density of about 5.3 · 105 , and a density of thermal energy of about 6.1 · 107 Wh/kg. In the December test, about 160 net kWh were produced, with a consumption of 35 kWh, a power density of about 7 · 103 W/kg and a thermal energy density of about 6.8 · 105 Wh/kg. The difference in results between the two tests may be seen in the overestimation of the weight of the charge in the first test (which was comprehensive of the weight of the two metal caps sealing the cylinder), and in the manufacturer’s choice of keeping temperatures under control in the second experiment to enhance the stability of the operating cycle. In any event, the results obtained place both devices several orders of magnitude outside the bounds of the Ragone plot region for chemical sources.

Even from the standpoint of a “blind” evaluation of volumetric energy density, if we consider the whole volume of the reactor core and the most conservative figures on energy production, we still get a value of (7.93 ± 0.8) 102 MJ/Liter that is one order of magnitude higher than any conventional source. Lastly, it must be remarked that both tests were terminated by a deliberate shutdown of the reactor, not by fuel exhaustion; thus, the energy densities that were measured should be considered as lower limits of real values.

The March test is to be considered an improvement over the one performed in December, in that various problems encountered in the first experiment were addressed and solved in the second one. In the next test experiment which is expected to start in the summer of 2013, and will last about six months, a long term performance of the E-Cat HT2 will be tested. This test will be crucial for further attempts to unveil the origin of the heat phenomenon observed so far.


Since You seem to be more knowledgeable in this topic than I am, could I get Your input on the validity of the research paper then ?



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by Thill
 


I was so stoked when I got the email about this. Unfortunately, I'm reluctant to ever discuss it here because people instantly feel the need to tell you how it's impossible.

What they don't realize is that everything we do was impossible until we did it.


That is why I have lost interest in the project before . It just seemed pointless to argue one way or another without any decent credible 3rd party verification.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thill
Since You seem to be more knowledgeable in this topic than I am, could I get Your input on the validity of the research paper then ?
Yes I read the paper, and you already have my feedback, that it wasn't completely independent, as there were aspects of the experiment not in control of the authors, and I saw no specific effort to measure current though the ground wire as the million dollar challenge suspected was a "cheat".

Normally the current in a ground wire is expected to be zero, and probably should be zero if everything is wired correctly, so for this reason it might not normally be measured. However in this case since ground wire current was named as a suspected source of anomalous energy, and a million dollars was offered to do the test while measuring ground wire current, and was refused, I can say if I had been hired to do an independent test I would have measured the ground wire current. To have not done this and mentioned it specifically in the report seems like an omission to me, or the authors were simply not permitted to measure it.

I even searched the pdf for the word "ground" just in case I missed it, and it's not there.

Now does this prove anything either way? No, of course not. This is just my observation about what seems like a glaring omission. I have some other technical observations about the way they seem to make lots of "assumptions" instead of better measurements so they don't have to assume so much, but really nothing that compares to failure to measure ground wire current to address expressed concerns about this.

It's possible that the ground wire current was zero as it should be, and that there were anomalous heat results as the paper suggests, but if the ground wire current wasn't measured, we don't really know.
edit on 21-5-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 

Just ran across this analysis of the pdf, which echoes my concerns about making too many assumptions, and not measuring enough:

Cold Fusion Paper Review

To summarize, the preprint is complete rubbish and the authors are probably linked to Andrea Rossi personally but that doesn't prevent the loudest blogger of the LHC's CMS Collaboration to partially endorse this preprint – without even attempting to read it because "this is not [his] field of research" – and suggest even though he hasn't looked at this paper at least to see that it's pure trash (and it's very easy to see), he will more closely follow cold fusion because of that. It's so easy to propagate lies and stupidity in this world especially because most people are even more stupid, mindless sheep than Tommaso Dorigo.
That summary is a bit harsh, but his analysis which is too long to repost here in its entirety does make a lot of valid points. For example, the the "35%" figure they mentioned in the report does not seem to be a measured value at all, but some sort of "guess" or assumed value. This is exactly the kind of sloppy assumption I referred to that should be measured instead of assumed.


Where does the figure 35% come from? The resistors (electric heaters of a sort) were on for "about" 35% of the time and off for "about" 65% of the time. Couldn't one just measure the precise time during which something was turned on and off?
I made the exact same observation independently, as well as some others this author mentions. There's way too much unnecessary guesswork going on for things like this, which could be measured, and that's just one example.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   
It was not an independent test according to New Energy Times.

Rossi Manipulates Academics to Create Illusion

The problem with this Mr. Rossi, he discredits the whole cold fusion science with his hoax.

There are real progress in the cold fusion subject and even CERN the holy grail of physics is looking into the LENR with interesting results.

But not Andrea Rossi. He is a convicted white-collar criminal with a string of failed energy ventures.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Thill
 


Thank you for bringing this to my attention. No matter what the usual nay-sayers and sceptics say, this is still a very interesting development to this story. This needs more flags.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by DiscreteParticle
PDF download of paper

This looks so cool (no pun). I wish I could understand what I just read!


Basically they used a thermal imaging camera to measure the heat output of the device. They get more heat generated from the chemicals with catalyst X that they would expect to get normally. So therefore they must have
cold fusion.

They haven't taken a spectroscopic emissions analysis graph, so it could simply be more energy is being converted to heat than light.

www.daviddarling.info...



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Very interesting here is the PDF file on the research.

PDF File



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   
There are trolls every where. Many are watching their energy buddies.

People hav "died" bringing technology like this forward. Just think of the damage to certain pockets if someone found an efficient way to produce power at little to no expense! 😳






top topics



 
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join