Car on water which instead of over 20 l/100km burns only aroun 5 liters per 100 kilometers
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: News on 25 Jun 2008 17:53 "daestrom" <daestrom(a)NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote in message news:g3ucrb030oq(a)news3.newsguy.com... > News wrote: >> "News" <killefitz(a)invalid.invalid> wrote in message >> news:g3tjgq$n1v$1(a)registered.motzarella.org... >>> >>> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia(a)not.at.this.address> wrote in message >>> news:48624ccf$0$1026$afc38c87(a)news.optusnet.com.au... >>> >>>>>> Got it: >>>>>> http://totalizm.nazwa.pl/boiler.htm >>>>>> >>>>>> It says: >>>>>> "The initial testing of the heater was done on 15 litres of >>>>>> water. The heater increased the temperature of this water in 10 >>>>>> minutes to over 60 degrees Celsius, consuming 11 Amperes of 220 >>>>>> Volt, 50 Hz AC electricity (i.e. 2600 watts in total). The water >>>>>> created a deposit of limestone. The home circuit breaker was set >>>>>> at 10 Amperes. The current was measured by the multimeter >>>>>> professional PR3051 (20A AC). " What was the temperature rise? From >>>>>> 10C to 60C? Knowing the >>>>>> tempertaure rise, it is then easy to calculate its efficiency and >>>>>> see if it does what it claims. And then compare that to a current >>>>>> gas or electric heater. If it does work and is over unity then >>>>>> it can only be made more efficient. >>>>> >>>>> But glancing those figures it doesn't look too impressive - yet. >>>> >>>> "The initial testing of the heater was done on 15 litres of water. >>>> The heater increased the temperature of this water in 10 minutes to >>>> over 60 degrees Celsius," >>>> >>>> Indeed, from what temperature? >>>> >>>> "consuming 11 Amperes of 220 Volt, 50 Hz AC electricity (i.e. 2600 >>>> watts in total)." >>>> >>>> 11 Amps at 220 volts is not 2600 watts, but 2420 watts. If he >>>> cannot get this calculation right, how sure are we about his >>>> ability to read a thermometer? >>>> >>>> "The water created a deposit of limestone." >>>> >>>> Really? Why would it do that - it wasn't being boiled. >>> >>> Limescale can be deposited without boiling. That is not an issue. If >>> one of these is heating a sealed thermals storage system limescale >>> is not a problem. >>> >>>> The expected temperature rise is 23 degrees. Water is a poor >>>> conductor of heat (which is why storage hot water systems work), so >>>> unless the water was mixed before the temperature was measured, the >>>> result would not be representative of the temperature of water as a >>>> whole. Overall the incorrect calculation of the power, the failure to >>>> mention the starting temperature or the issue relating to measuring >>>> the end temperature makes me doubt this person's competence to >>>> perform the experiment, even if he's being honest about the results. >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> Enough info is there. Put it at 2.5 kW to sound up. Calculate temp >>> rise from 10C to 60C, 15C to 60C and room temp 20C to 60C and that >>> will give some figures. As he says, aluminium is not the ideal >>> metal to use, stainless steel is. >>> >>> It think there is enough evidence to say it works - enough from NZ >>> anyhow. But is it feasible? >>> >>> Sonic boilers are not new. James Griggs invented the hydrosonic pump. >>> http://www.rexresearch.com/griggs/griggs.htm >>> >>> You can buy one. Many claim it is an over unity device. >> >> The company: >> http://www.hydrodynamics.com/product_pics.htm >> http://www.hydrodynamics.com/technology_review.htm >> >> They are also on sale in Moldavia - where they were developed entirely >> separately from Griggs. > > But you'll notice these folks do *not* claim any overunity nonsense. They > explain that 'shockwave' heating is a way of heating water without using a > high temperature surface to get the heat into the water. So it has some > advantages in certain applications (no cold spots, no fouling or scaling > of surfaces if the water has a lot of contaminants). I would like to see hydrosonic pumps developed further. They can only get more efficient. Large boiler companies like Viessmann and Vaillant need to invest in it. A domestic unit would be nice. They are quite simple and no scale build up either. Griggs does not claim that and initially didn't know if it was or not. He may have thought it was, but did not want to be regarded as a crank and be discredited before it was even off the ground. The Moldavian unit was tested by NASA and proved not to be over unity. However many in Moldavia say it is as when installed replacing resistance heating, the electric bill dropped substantially. :-) The lines losses never occurred to them.
From: Eeyore on 25 Jun 2008 18:38 News wrote: > You can buy one. Many claim it is an over unity device. Many people are IDIOTS. Graham
From: News on 25 Jun 2008 18:39 "DB" <abc(a)some.net> wrote in message news:gyz8k.2235$b_3.1732(a)fe127.usenetserver.com... > News wrote: >> > <snip> >>>> >>>> Got it: >>>> http://totalizm.nazwa.pl/boiler.htm > > What a bunch of nonsense. > >> A COP of 1.7 is for that each kW consumed 1.7 is output. Is that over >> unity? > > That is not what COP means. 1.7 kw is output _and_ moved. The extra heat > doesn't just appear as if by magic. I know what COP is in relation to a heat pump. The pump "moves" heat. There is no heat being moved here. Input is electrical energy and output is heat. Both can be measured in kW.
From: News on 25 Jun 2008 20:15 "DB" <abc(a)some.net> wrote in message news:CTz8k.26503$fX5.22639(a)fe109.usenetserver.com... > News wrote: >> >> "DB" <abc(a)some.net> wrote in message >> news:gyz8k.2235$b_3.1732(a)fe127.usenetserver.com... >>> News wrote: >>>> >>> <snip> >>>>>> >>>>>> Got it: >>>>>> http://totalizm.nazwa.pl/boiler.htm >>> >>> What a bunch of nonsense. >>> >>>> A COP of 1.7 is for that each kW consumed 1.7 is output. Is that over >>>> unity? >>> >>> That is not what COP means. 1.7 kw is output _and_ moved. The extra heat >>> doesn't just appear as if by magic. >> >> I know what COP is in relation to a heat pump. The pump "moves" heat. >> There is no heat being moved here. Input is electrical energy and output >> is heat. Both can be measured in kW. > > Then someone is screwing up or lying. It is just that simple. If such a > simple device did exist, there would be a fire like excitement on every > university campus in the world. > > No excitement, the claim is bullshit. You are obviously a very pessimistic man. Do you think the world is going end soon as well?
From: News on 25 Jun 2008 21:12
"DB" <abc(a)some.net> wrote in message news:qNB8k.106371$WG2.37468(a)fe117.usenetserver.com... > News wrote: >> >> "DB" <abc(a)some.net> wrote in message >> news:CTz8k.26503$fX5.22639(a)fe109.usenetserver.com... >>> News wrote: >>>> >>>> "DB" <abc(a)some.net> wrote in message >>>> news:gyz8k.2235$b_3.1732(a)fe127.usenetserver.com... >>>>> News wrote: >>>>>> >>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Got it: >>>>>>>> http://totalizm.nazwa.pl/boiler.htm >>>>> >>>>> What a bunch of nonsense. >>>>> >>>>>> A COP of 1.7 is for that each kW consumed 1.7 is output. Is that >>>>>> over unity? >>>>> >>>>> That is not what COP means. 1.7 kw is output _and_ moved. The extra >>>>> heat doesn't just appear as if by magic. >>>> >>>> I know what COP is in relation to a heat pump. The pump "moves" heat. >>>> There is no heat being moved here. Input is electrical energy and >>>> output is heat. Both can be measured in kW. >>> >>> Then someone is screwing up or lying. It is just that simple. If such a >>> simple device did exist, there would be a fire like excitement on every >>> university campus in the world. >>> >>> No excitement, the claim is bullshit. >> >> You are obviously a very pessimistic man. > > Nope, realistic. You, on the other hand, are a believer. Enough independent evidence suggests it works (the NZ one). Whether it is efficient enough is another matter. Only proper testing will prove that. Then maybe some serious R&D. >> Do you think the world is going end soon as well? > > No. Why would you ask such a stupid question? Because you are obviously a very pessimistic man. |