Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[killswitch]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/05/20/finally-independent-testing-of-rossis-e-cat-cold-fusion-device-maybe-the-world-will-change-after-all/

[br549]

Wesley:
the Israeli 100-500 MHZ amplifier.
model: XRF 694 made for secret military encryption devices.

Do you know how much input power to the amplifier (from the frequency generator) is required { millawatts or watts)?
Thank You:

[verpies]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/05/20/finally-independent-testing-of-rossis-e-cat-cold-fusion-device-maybe-the-world-will-change-after-all/

COP = 2.1, that's great!

Compare:

      E-Cat HT       |   E-Cat  HT2       |   Gasoline
---------------------|---------------------|----------------------
       ? ? ?            |    713 MJ/L        |   37 MJ/L
  2199 MJ/kg       | 165600 MJ/kg   |  47 MJ/kg


However, these measurements of energy density were made in Rossi's lab, thus they cannot be called "completely independent"
I'm sure TinselKoala could build a giant inductive cooker under Rossi's floor (or walls) if he put his mind to it.

Also, the input power measurement used "clamp ammeters" which raises questions about the accuracy of this measurement at high frequencies. Clamp ammeters usually cannot even handle high kHz frequencies and some of them are insensitive to DC.

P.S.
All E-Cat figures above are worst-case figures under assumption that DC power delivery is not happening.

[stivep]

Wesley:
the Israeli 100-500 MHZ amplifier.
model: XRF 694 made for secret military encryption devices.

Do you know how much input power to the amplifier (from the frequency generator) is required { millawatts or watts)?
Thank You:

well of you take 45db to 55 db amplification at 100W out............ and assume that amplifier is nothing more than any amplifier............... from the calculation you see that................
input is no more than 5 miliW That is why I installed attenuator  between  generator and input ....along with  oscilloscope  to see if I'm not overdriving  input.
The $250 expense+ shipping -
( original price of amplifier was over $10K) and time to get it from Israel is worth my attention.


the AWG2041 Tektronix generator is used only as low frequency from 1 to>> Hz to modulate input of HP3200B     
In the effect you get not CW ( continuous wave)  but wave that is as long in time as timing( frequency ) of driving generator.
The reason for it is I want to simulate effect of me pulsing microphone of transmitter from  my first videos of Colman- to see if that is important.
So now AWG2041 Tektronix generator is doing pulsing for me - all I need to do is just adjust intervals.


At the end I hope  no amplifiers will be needed
The close you are to frequency of response the lower activation power is needed.
Along with mail product  say 100W out there are all of bi-products harmonics spurious and so on.
How if Colman was not right....In his time 1956  there was not so easy to get the right lab.
How about id he thought that frequency of his compound is 300MHz  activated with small milliW  transmitter , but in reality compound was reacting to  harmonics  of much lower power at much different  frequency..


That still remains to be found


Wesley

[TinselKoala]

COP = 2.1, that's great!

Compare:

      E-Cat HT       |   E-Cat  HT2       |   Gasoline
---------------------|---------------------|----------------------
       ? ? ?            |    713 MJ/L        |   37 MJ/L
  2199 MJ/kg       | 165600 MJ/kg   |  47 MJ/kg


However, these measurements of energy density were made in Rossi's lab, thus they cannot be called "completely independent"
I'm sure TinselKoala could build a giant inductive cooker under Rossi's floor (or walls) if he put his mind to it.

Also, the input power measurement used "clamp ammeters" which raises questions about the accuracy of this measurement at high frequencies. Clamp ammeters usually cannot handle even high kHz frequencies.

1. Rossi has always claimed a COP of 6, and even has spoken of "guarantees" of that much. Yet, as measurements and tests improve, the COP from his devices goes down. A COP of 2.1 is not "great", it's miserable, not enough to overcome conversion losses, and easily within the error margins of an "experiment" like this one.
2. The testing described in the paper, performed by Rossi's defacto partner Levi and some other carefully picked persons, is NOT an "independent" test at all.
3. The testing took place right there in Rossi's workshop, obviously a rental space in a shared warehouse, with partition walls defining Rossi's area. The photographs prove this.
4. The power feeds, etc. come into Rossi's workshop area through the partition walls. This has been known for a long time.
5. Rossi may or may not have been present at the actual worktable where controls and measurements were happening, but we know that he was in fact present in the warehouse during the testing described in the paper. This is evident in the direct questioning of Essen.
6. The clampon meter used to monitor input current is not sensitive to DC.
7. Rossi as usual does not permit monitoring of input power with adequate instrumentation, like oscilloscopes and spectrum analyzers or even quality power analyzers.
8. A series of untenable assumptions about emissivity, etc. call into question the calculations of output power derived from the thermal imagery.
9. The "shadows" on the thermal imagery are not the heating coils as claimed in the paper, they are the spaces between the coils. It would have been easy to show a thermal image of the active device with coils OFF to compare with active device with coils ON but this was not done. Why?

So there is no need for me, or Rossi, or anyone else to set up an elaborate wireless power transmission system. Simply controlling the testing by refusing proper measurements, as usual, along with sneaking around behind the partitions and turning on the DC bias supply..... injecting DC into the device along with the AC from the mains, on the same wires, not readable by the consumer-grade clampon meter......  There are enough issues and uncertainties here to conclude that Once Again Rossi has succeeded.... not in demonstrating the truth of his claims, but rather how easy it is to fool some of the people all of the time.

The images below are from the paper's Fig. 3, where it is claimed in the paper that the darker bands are the heat coils shadowing the brighter heat from the inner chamber. But even this is false. I've taken the image and decomposed it into its RGB channels and its CIE Lch channels. The first image below is the Green channel from the RGB color space, and the second one is the chrominance channel from the CIE Lch decomposition. No further "enhancement" has been applied, just the channel extractions, and I'm working with the .jpg directly from the .pdf  of the paper's reproduction of the thermal imager's output. If I had the original to work with I could probably bring out the individual glowing wires, which can almost be seen already.