FacebookTwitterDiggStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditTechnoratiLinkedin

Preliminary Assessment of Rossi's Validation Paper

on .

As most of you know by now, there was a report of an independent validation test performed on Andrea Rossi's Ecat this week.  (view it here)  

Overall positive impression

Our preliminary assessment among the team is that it is a generally good report with no obvious errors or glaring omissions.  It is easily the best evidence to date that Rossi has a working technology, and, if verified openly and widely, this report could be remembered as historic.

That's not to say that we feel total confidence in the report, either.  It is unfortunate that there are some justified concerns about the independence of the test team, since many of the authors are names that we have seen before in the context of Rossi.  Plus, we are disappointed that none of the authors are willing to present at ICCF18 in July, which would certainly be an extremely welcoming audience for such a report, if the details stand up to further scrutiny.

Other technical questions and criticisms

It was good that the authors were satisfyingly conservative when things were in question.  Examples include using an emissivity of 1 for the first test, using bottom side of apparatus, including the shadowed areas, and adding an additional 10% for unknown errors.

It was also satisfying that even if they ignored convection and included the control box power, it was still above unity.  

The whole COP discussion is rather arbitrary IF the input power goes primarily to heating up the bulk to trigger it thermally, as it appears.  A little insulation - or better, yet, an adjustable cooling system, might allow the device to run at or near self sustaining.  

However, some things about the input power measurement aren't entirely clear.  A block diagram of the wiring and instrumentation points would clarify where they were measuring the power input from at different points in the experiment.  Some screen captures of the wave form on the power input would be stronger indication that it was something the power analyzer could accurately measure.  Rossi has mentioned using frequencies to stimulate the reaction to occur.  If the frequency of that was high enough, the power meter may not "see" the power delivered by that part of the wave form.  If the control box was putting out that sort of signal for the live run and the "dummy" run, though, the dummy run would have appeared to show excess energy, which is good that it did not according to the report.  However, the active load may interact in a way that allows high frequency power use while the resistive load does not.  It is not clear from the report if the control box was used in the dummy mode in the same way it was during the active run.

The specs for the power meter used are here:  http://www.industrial-needs.com/technical-data/power-anlayser-PCE-830.htm 

I'm not very convinced by the heating cycle shape argument - that is a system with a lot of non-linearities and multiple time constants involved.  I think more tests, or comparison to the temperature curves of the "dummy" unit, and with varying controlled heater power cycles would be a more valid comparison.

One further takeaway was that it seamed from this report, that this reactor design is difficult to control at the higher COPS. Strong evidence of this is the failure of the first test. This may be due to the nature of close location of nano particles in the fuel mix but may be effectively resolved by better thermal extraction as mentioned above.

Call for more openness to prove this to the world definitively

We, the MFMP, on behalf of the global population, call on the authors and Andrea Rossi to make the raw data and more detailed instrumention details for the entire test available for verification of calculations made form the data.  We are willing to host the data and help stimulate the analysis of it, or simply be another participant re-analyzing it.  

This publication raises the bar for Defkalion, Brillouin, and anybody else claiming a valid technology to present something more compelling, also.  

Many comments in the LENR blogosphere have suggested that the MFMP would be a good, independent, trust worthy validator.  We are honoured by these views and would certainly be eager to help facilitate any further validation tests for Rossi, Defkallion, or Brillouin etc. in any way that would ensure the facts are established whilst the IP of the originator is wholly protected. 

Comments   

 
0 #110 Keisha 2018-05-11 19:04
My spouse and I absolutely love your blog and find nearly
all of your post's to be precisely what I'm looking for.
can you offer guest writers to write content for yourself?
I wouldn't mind producing a post or elaborating on a number of the subjects you
write concerning here. Again, awesome weblog!
Quote
 
 
0 #109 Keisha 2018-05-11 19:01
My spouse and I absolutely love your blog and find nearly
all of your post's to be precisely what I'm looking for.
can you offer guest writers to write content for yourself?
I wouldn't mind producing a post or elaborating on a number of the subjects you
write concerning here. Again, awesome weblog!
Quote
 
 
0 #108 Keisha 2018-05-11 18:59
My spouse and I absolutely love your blog and find nearly
all of your post's to be precisely what I'm looking for.
can you offer guest writers to write content for yourself?
I wouldn't mind producing a post or elaborating on a number of the subjects you
write concerning here. Again, awesome weblog!
Quote
 
 
0 #107 Keisha 2018-05-11 18:57
My spouse and I absolutely love your blog and find nearly
all of your post's to be precisely what I'm looking for.
can you offer guest writers to write content for yourself?
I wouldn't mind producing a post or elaborating on a number of the subjects you
write concerning here. Again, awesome weblog!
Quote
 
 
0 #106 live22 2018-04-09 13:25
Just desire to say your article is as surprising.
The clarity in your post is simply excellent
and i could assume you are an expert on this subject.
Fine with your permission allow me to grab your RSS feed to keep
up to date with forthcoming post. Thanks a million and please
keep up the enjoyable work.
Quote
 
 
0 #105 PetraChief 2018-03-07 21:07
I have checked your website and i've found some duplicate content, that's why you don't
rank high in google, but there is a tool that can help you to create 100% unique articles,
search for: Best article rewritwer Ercannou's essential tools
Quote
 
 
0 #104 PetraChief 2018-03-07 21:06
I have checked your website and i've found some duplicate content, that's why you don't
rank high in google, but there is a tool that can help you to create 100% unique articles,
search for: Best article rewritwer Ercannou's essential tools
Quote
 
 
0 #103 PetraChief 2018-03-07 21:05
I have checked your website and i've found some duplicate content, that's why you don't
rank high in google, but there is a tool that can help you to create 100% unique articles,
search for: Best article rewritwer Ercannou's essential tools
Quote
 
 
0 #102 Virginia 2018-02-21 17:14
Hallo! ich einfach Auff den Merk geben Ihne einen bbig thumbs uup für diee ausgezeichnete Informationen Siee haben, hieer
hier zu diesem Beitrag. Ich werde Rückkehr Blog für mehnr bald.
Quote
 
 
0 #101 Josef 2018-02-19 21:49
Erstaunlich! Dieser Blog sieht genau gerade wiie mein alter!
Es ist auuf einem vollständig unterschiedlich en Thema , aber es
hat ziemlich die gleiche Layout uund Design. Ausgezeichnete Wahl der Farben!
Quote
 

Add comment


Here is your generous contributions so far towards our $500,000 target, thanks everyone! : $45,020   Please Donate
See the current state of our booked costs here