This document is being frequently updated to describe the September 2012 reports : please check for the latest version at lenr.qumbu.com

Version with Frames and Index


Update : Sep 11, 2012

Warning -- this being updated "live" !!

This report has not been updated, because there have been no new reported measurements (though Rossi has kept his readers informed of the general progress in his blog.)

On Sep 8-9 2012 an "Ecat Convention" was held in Zurich. Rossi reported that the overall status is:

  • The "Domestic" eCat is undergoing certification at an undisclosed laboratory, and NO new information will be provided until the certification is complete.

  • The original 1MW "warm" Ecat has been certified for industrial use. (No details have been provided).

  • The first 1MW Ecat has been installed at an undisclosed military location. A second 1MW will be shipped shortly to an undisclosed customer. The third will be delivered to a customer in "North Italy" in about 3 months. The name of the customer will be disclosed, and it may be possible for "qualified" people to visit it, by appointment.

  • Rossi is developing a new "Hot" eCat operating in the 800-1200C range, and is cooperating with Siemens to couple it with a turbine for electrical generation
At this conference Rossi released a preliminary report on the hot eCat. At almost the same time one of his licensees issued a brief report that they had failed to validate the "hot" eCat.

Update : Feb 22, 2012

Ian Bryce of the Australian Skeptics Society has proposed a new "Wiring" fake, which could account for some of the experiments. This is described in the "Hidden Wires" section.

However, in both the September 7 and October 6 experiments, Lewan reported that

A clamp ampere meter was used to measure the current fed to the whole system as well as the current feeding the electrical resistance. The difference was found to be insignificant at all times.

and in September, that

The electrical connection was made through a residual-current device to make sure that no current was fed through the ground cable.

These eliminate any possibility of the Bryce fake in those experiments.

Update : Sep 21, 2011

Significant questions have been raised about the steam calorimetry used in these experiments, particularly by Steven B. Krivit, addressing the question of "Steam Quality", which can vary from "0% Dry" (the output is composed entirely of liquid water) to "100% Dry" (the output is composed entirely of water vapour).

My analysis, however, indicates that very low steam quality is unlikely. (See http://lenr.qumbu.com for links to my latest versions).

In any event, not all fakes could be excluded even assuming high steam quality (95% Dry), so the conclusions of this paper are not significantly changed, and I have not updated it to reflect different estimates of the excess power produced.

 

1. Abstract

A new "Cold Fusion" device was demonstrated at the University of Bologna, Italy on Jan 15, 2011. Unlike the Pons and Fleischmann setup, which uses Palladium and Deuterium and can take months to perform an experiment, the Rossi/Focardi eCAT uses Hydrogen and Nickel, produces large amounts of power (more than 10kW), and can be turned on and off on command.

Several experiments have been performed : One in December 2010 by a panel of independent scientists (led by prof Levi), one in January 2011, attended by the same scientists and invited press, and one in February 2011 attended only by Levi, and for which a formal report has not been issued. An experiment was conducted in March 2011, by Kullander and Essén. Two experiments were conducted by Mats Lewan in April.

This paper attempts to prove that the Rossi/Focardi device is real, by ruling out all known fakes. For any particular fake the total energy and run-time is computed, assuming that the ENTIRE unknown volume is occupied by the fake material, and that its conversion to heat energy is 100% efficient. If the fake could run LONGER than the experiment, then it is NOT eliminated. If the fake would run out of fuel before the end of the experiment, then the fake is eliminated.

If ALL known fakes are eliminated, then the device must be real.

The December/January experiments were too short to rule out ANY of these theoretical fakes. But if Levi's informal reports on the February trial are accepted, then ALL chemical fakes are eliminated. However, neither the January or February reports rule out a Tarallo Water Diversion Fake.

The March report probably rules out a Tarallo fake -- but since the Horizontal arm was NOT unwrapped, it does NOT rule out all chemical fakes.

Two new tests were run in April. These definitely rule out a Tarallo fake. The experimental setup was adequate, but since the eCat was NOT unwrapped the time of the run was NOT long enough to rule out ANY of the chemical fakes. (Only some of the stored-heat fakes are eliminated).

At present EVERY known fake has been eliminated by at least ONE of the experiments, but the Rossi eCat has NOT been proven to be real by any ONE experiment. Some will argue that this means it's real, while others will argue that it could still be fake.

It must, however be noted that Rossi made the "Calorimetric Black Box" eCAT available without any restrictions (other than the use of radioactive spectral detectors), so the lack of proof is due to defects in the observers instruments or techniques, not due to his attempt to conceal anything.

An Italian patent has been issued : Patent granted for the energy catalyzer. World-wide and US patents are reportedly still being pursued.

Printable HTML Version
Printable PDF Version

2. Introduction

A new "Cold Fusion" or "LENR" (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) device -- the Rossi/Focardi Energy Catalyzer or eCAT was recently demonstrated at the University of Bologna, Italy on Jan 15, 2011: Rossi-Focardi Energy Catalyzer

An second experiment was performed in February : Cold Fusion: 18 hour test excludes combustion A good summary of these is given by Scott Chubb Infinite Energy • Issue 96 • March/April 2011

A third test was performed by Kullander and Essén Experimental test of a mini-Rossi device at the Leonardocorp, Bologna 29 March 2011 and Swedish physicists on the E-cat: “It’s a nuclear reaction”.

Ny Teknik tested the energy catalyzer in April 2011.

It currently appears unlikely that any further demonstrations will be performed before October 2011.

Also see the Wiki Energy Catalyzer and, for a very skeptical view : Focardi-Rossi Energy-Catalyzer

An Italian TV program, RaiNews24, witnessed some of the tests: The Magic of Mr. Rossi (dubbed in English).

Cold fusion was first announced by Pons and Fleischmann in 1989, and was rapidly "debunked". But contrary to popular (and mainstream scientific) opinion, Cold Fusion was never actually disproved (see the history section.) Work has continued in a variety of private, university and government studies, with an annual ICCF conference, now in its 17th year. Most of the work has concentrated on the Pons and Fleischmann setup, which uses Palladium and Deuterium. It has been replicated hundreds of times, though experiments can take months to run, and require sophisticated calorimetry.

In contrast, the Rossi/Focardi eCAT uses Hydrogen and Nickel, produces large amounts of power (more than 10kW), and can be turned on and off on command. Rossi plans to install a 1MW water-heating plant, made by connecting 300 4 kW devices in series and parallel, in Athens, Greece, in October 2011. A greek company, Defkalion Green Technologies S.A. has world-wide rights (excluding the Americas), and is building a factory for the production of 10 kW domestic units, possibly as early as November 2011.

An Italian patent has been issued : Patent granted for the energy catalyzer -- although it is not clear whether this is honored in the rest of the EU. World-wide and US patents are reportedly still being pursued.

All of these eCAT demonstrations were primarily a "black box" calorimetry experiment. Because his patent application has not yet been approved, Rossi declines to make detailed comments on the process, or to let anyone see inside his "reactor chamber".

This paper analyses three main classes of "Fake" :

  • Finite-Energy Fakes
  • These Fakes have a finite energy content, for instance, batteries or chemicals

    Villa notes in his report on the January experiment:

    In the present test, as a precautionary attitude, whatever was not known, not disclosed or not understood has been considered as the energy source. This forces to consider relevant only very large energy productions, as those described in [1] where the reactor has been working for weeks and month
    ....
    The duration of the tests would be directly proportional to the mass and volume of unknown origin. For the present set-up a convincing evidence would include a power production of (order of) 10 kW sustained for weeks in a controlled and monitorized environment.

    For these we attempt to put numbers to that philosophy, by calculating UPPER BOUNDS on what any known chemical process could produce.

  • Unlimited-Energy Fakes
  • This kind of fake can run for an unlimited time, and could therefore run longer than a chemical fake.

    They can only be eliminated by more stringent inspections and experimental setups.

    The Tarallo Water Diversion fake is the most plausible of these.

  • Alternative Implementations
  • This kind of fake would pass all of the black-box tests and all possible external inspections.

    They therefore represent alternative implementations and, if true, would be as great a breakthrough in science as the Rossi eCat.

If it's not real, how can the experiment be faked? And if it's faked, how can we detect it, or eliminate it?

As Sherlock Holmes said in The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet:

“It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

If all possible fakes are eliminated then the eCat must be real -- even though we do not know how it works. If current science can't explain it, then the science is wrong.

3. History

Cold fusion was first announced by Pons and Fleischmann in 1989, and was rapidly "debunked".

But contrary to popular (and mainstream scientific) opinion, Cold Fusion was never actually disproved.

Cravens And Letts (The Enabling Criteria of Electrochemical Heat: Beyond Reasonable Doubt) performed a statistical analysis of 167 papers, and identified 4 criteria which were satisfied in all successful experiments (including Pons and Fleischmann's original paper), and in which one or more were omitted in failed experiments -- including all the original "Debunking" papers. The most important are Lewis (Caltech) -- where NONE of these criteria were met, and Williams (Harwell), in which only ONE was met. These two papers effectively removed Cold Fusion from main stream science (and funding). Cravens And Letts point out that although ignoring these criteria almost guarantees failure, following them improves, but does not ensure success. Alchemists were well advised to include the "eye of newt" in their potions, since they did not understand which of the many steps were critical to success, and which were irrelevant. Perhaps those alchemists used better science than Lewis and Williams.

Also see Krivit: How Can Cold Fusion Be Real, Considering It Was Disproved By Several Well-Respected Labs In 1989?

Work has continued in a variety of private, university and government studies (Experiments), with an annual ICCF conference, now in its 17th year. Hundreds of papers have been written, some in peer-reviewed mainstream journals. (Library).

Most of the work has concentrated on the Pons and Fleischmann setup, which uses Palladium and Deuterium. It has been replicated hundreds of times. However, it has not reached 100% reproducibility. Experiments take months to "load" the deuterium into the palladium (though recent experiments with co-depositing deuterium and palladium eliminate this step), and are not guaranteed to work. (Though a set of cathodes which work in one experiment will almost always work in a different set-up). They require very subtle calorimetry over a long period, which introduces doubt into the results.

In addition to the calorimetric results, a 'CR-39' polycarbonate detector (long used by the Russians) placed next to the electrode shows clear evidence of high-energy particles (Mossier-Boss et al : Use of CR-39 in Pd/D co-deposition experiments and Reply to a comment .. by Kowalski).

The first reported work using Nickel and Hydrogen was by Francesco Piantelli (See articles by Krivit: Deuterium and Palladium Not Required and Piantelli-Focardi Publication and Replication Path ).

The Rossi/Focardi eCat uses Hydrogen and Nickel, produces large amounts of energy (more than 10kW), and can be turned on and off on command.

4. eCAT Demonstrator Apparatus

4.1. January eCAT Apparatus


Image from Passerini Report (January 2011)
Image from Levi report (December 2010?).

4.2. March eCAT Apparatus

Fig 5 Fig 2 Fig 4 Fig 3

4.3. April eCAT Apparatus

It seems that the two experiments used slightly different eCATs -- April 19 used the March setup, and April 28 used a version with a truncated chimney.

April-19April 19? April-28April 28?

4.4. Sept/Oct 6 Apparatus

The new "fatcat" no longer has a Tube boiler. Instead, a "wafer" containing up to three "cores" sits in a simple kettle, discharging water or steam through an outlet in its lid.

The "fat eCat is in the background. The heat exchanger is in the right-foreground.


The Ecat with its lid removed, showing the top heat exchanger.

4.5. General Structure and Operation

The setup is

                                              *======> steam 
                                              |        outlet
                                         *---------*
                                         |    :    |
                                         |    :    |
                                         | Vertical|
                            Main         | Arm     | 
                            Unit         |    :    |
                                         |    :    |
                           Horizontal Arm|    :    |
                           *-------------*    :    |
                           |    Reactor       :    |
                           |   * - - - - - -* :    |
                           |   :Shielding   : :    |
           *------*        |   *- - - - - - * :    |
Water  ====| pump |=======>|::>: Heat       :-*    |
           *------*        |   : Exchanger  :      |
       *--------------*    |   *- - - - - - *      |
AC:--->| Control Unit |===>|::>: Resistors  :      |
       *--------------*    |   *- - - - - --*      |
            *------*       |   : Chamber    :      |
Compressed  | H    |======>|::>: Ni/H       :      |
Hydrogen    |      |       |   *- - - - - - *      |
            *------*       |                       |
            ^^^^^^^^       *-----------------------*
            scale            ||                || metal legs
                        *============================* 
                                 board
The components are:
  • Main Unit (Made up of a Horizontal and Vertical Arm)
  • Horizontal Arm : Contains the Reactor Unit, reportedly made up of:
    • Chamber -- contains Nickel, fed with Hydrogen
    • Resistors -- used to "ignite" the reactor, then lowered to maintain the reaction
    • Heat exchanger -- heats and/or boils the water.
    • Radiation Shielding -- Lead
  • Vertical Arm
  • Water and Pump
  • Control Unit powered from an AC wall-plug.
  • Compressed Hydrogen bottle, weighed before and after.

The entire Horizontal and Vertical arms were enveloped in tinfoil for the December/January trials.

The presence or absence of any evidence of nuclear activity is NOT considered in this paper.

Operation:

  • Load the reactor with hydrogen
  • Apply 1 kW through the control panel until the reactor "ignites"
  • Reduce the input power to 400 W (Jan) or 80 W (Feb)
  • Pump water in at a measured rate and temperature
  • Jan: Observe steam output, measure temperature and dryness
    OR
    Feb: Measure the water temperature at the outlet
  • Accurately measure the weight of the hydrogen bottle, before and after

5. Experiments

5.1. January 2011 Experiment

In December 2010 a team of scientists was allowed to examine the device, and performed a number of experiments.

In January 2011 a "press" demonstration was held -- though the reactor developed an internal problem (reportedly on the leads to an internal heating resistor), took a long time to "ignite", and ran at lower efficiency (higher input power).

These two will be referred to as the "January" apparatus and experiment.

The things we know about the January apparatus as a whole are:

  • The input power to the controller
  • The input water volume and temperature
  • The output steam temperature and dryness
  • The amount of hydrogen used
  • ESTIMATED volumes of the various elements (Villa)
    (These could be confirmed from the photographs).
  • A very rough estimate of the weight of the Control Box (Levi)

Villa reported:

The basic observable elements are an horizontal metallic tube (approximate length 70 cm, diameter 20 cm, 22 l volume, 30 kg weight as a guess-estimate) as the reaction chamber, a vertical tube for steam output (50 cm length, 15 cm diameter, 9 l volume), a control system box (approx 40x40x40 cm3 dimensions, 64 l volume, unknown weight), a water pump and an hydrogen bottle.

Levi reported:

Prudentially I have lifted the control box in search for any other eventually hidden cable and found none. The weight of the control box was of few Kg.

The things we do NOT know about the January apparatus include:

  • The contents of the controller
  • The power from the controller to the main unit
  • The output steam volume
  • The weights before and after, other than the hydrogen bottle
  • Whether any air was taken in by the device, or combustion products released.

ASSUMING that ALL the water was converted to steam the total OUTPUT energy was computed:

  • Heat water to boiling point
  • Convert to steam
  • Heat the steam

Given the rate of flow, the output power (kW) was calculated, and the INPUT power (kW) to the controller was subtracted.

The volume of the various elements were estimated by Mauro Villa to be:

  • Control Box 60 liters
  • Horizontal Arm 22 liters
  • Vertical Arm 9 liters

The measured values as summarized in LENR-CANR News are:

  • Duration: 1 hour, of which 30 minutes was steam-producing
  • Flow Rate: 17.5 L/Hr (292 ml/min)
  • Input Power : 400W
  • Excess Power 12.5 kW
  • Factor 12.9/0.4 = 32.25
  • Excess Energy (Excess Power x Run Time): 6.25 kWH
  • Hydrogen: less than 0.1 g of hydrogen was consumed.
    If the hydrogen had been burned it would have produced 0.0143 MJ (0.00397 kWH)

At the press conference Rossi announced that they have a working system providing heating in their own plant (presumably with multiple eCATS), and that he plans to install a 1MW Plant in Athens, Greece in October, 2011.

Reports:

5.2. February 2011 Experiment

The February trial reportedly had the same general structure, except that is was only used to HEAT water, not to convert it to steam.

The primary observer of the February run, Prof Levi, was allowed to examine everything EXCLUDING the reactor chamber, which he estimated to be about 1 liter in volume. He reported that a lot of the volume of the horizontal and vertical arms was insulation, and that lead shielding was visible around the reactor chamber.

Nyteknik.se: Cold Fusion: 18 hour test excludes combustion

“This time I opened the control unit (and examined the interior), as someone said that it could contain a hidden battery. And I can swear in court that the box was empty, except for the control electronics – five very simple PLCs – and it weighed about seven kilograms,” said Levi.

“I have also seen inside the reactor device itself – most of the volume is isolation, and most of the weight of about 30 kg is due to lead.”

He confirmed that the reactor chamber, supposedly containing nickel powder, the secret catalysts and hydrogen gas, had a volume of around one liter. The reactor chamber was the only part he could not inspect.


LENR-CANR: Rossi 18-hour demonstration

On February 10 and 11, 2011, Levi et al. (U. Bologna) performed another test of the Rossi device. Compared to the January 14 test, they used a much higher flow rate, to keep the cooling water from vaporizing. This is partly to recover more heat, and partly because Celani and others criticized phase-change calorimetry as too complicated. There were concerns about the enthalpy of wet steam versus dry steam, and the use of a relative humidity meter to determine how dry the steam was. A source close to the test gave Jed Rothwell the following figures. These are approximations: ....

The things we know about the February apparatus as a whole are:

  • The Control Unit and all parts of the Main Unit excluding the reactor were inspected.
  • The input power to the controller
  • The input water volume and temperature
  • The output water temperature
  • The amount of hydrogen used
  • ESTIMATED volume of the reactor CHAMBER is 1 liter
  • ESTIMATED mass of the REACTOR (Levi reports that the mass was 30 kg)

The things we do NOT know about the February apparatus include:

  • The power from the controller to the main unit
  • The VOLUME of the whole REACTOR.
  • The weights before and after, other than the hydrogen bottle
  • Whether any air was taken in by the device, or combustion products released.

The values reported by Rothwell are:

  • Run Time: 18 hours
  • Flow Rate: 3,000 L/h = ~833 ml/s.
  • Cooling water input temperature: 15°C
  • Cooling water output temperature: ~20°C
  • Input power from control electronics: variable, average 80 W, closer to 20 W for 6 hours
  • Excess Power 16 kW
  • Factor 16.08/0.08 = 201
  • Excess Energy (Excess Power x Run Time): 288 kWH
  • Hydrogen: less than 0.4 g of hydrogen was consumed.
    If the hydrogen had been burned it would have produced 0.0572 MJ (0.0159 kWH)

However, the some of the values reported in Nyteknik are significantly different (and in favor of Rossi's eCAT):

“Minimum power was 15 kilowatts, and that’s a conservative value. I calculated it several times. At night we did a measurement and the device then worked very stable and produced 20 kilowatts.”

Initially, the temperature of the inflowing water was seven degrees Celsius and for a while the outlet temperature was 40 degrees Celsius. A flow rate of about one liter per second, equates to a peak power of 130 kilowatts. The power output was later stabilized at 15 to 20 kilowatts.

Note : Levi has not released a report of this experiment, and Rossi has declined to comment on it.

This paper uses Rothwell's numbers.

5.3. Interlude : Other Information, Feb-March, 2011

Rossi continues to provide a trickle of information (some of it conflicting with previous statements) on his blog JANUARY 15th FOCARDI AND ROSSI PRESS CONFERENCE

For instance, he now now indicates that it is not the ELECTRICAL power which modulates the output, but the HYDROGEN:

Our plants of 1 MW are made with series and parallels of 10 kW modules. Our 10 kW modules have been tested from 2 years and we have a deep knowledge of them. If the temperature or the pressure inside the apparatus goes critic we cut the hydrogen supply and cool down the E-Cat increasing the flow of water as much as necessary. Consider that we do not use radioactive materials and we do not produce rad waste, that a single module has a volume of about 1 liter and is very easy to cool down with water. Every module is controlled indipendently from the others and if one module has to be stopped the others can work.

Through a live interview with NyTeknik Rossi answered a number of questions : E-cat inventor in live chat with the readers (+ Video Interview) and And here are 36 more questions – with Rossi's answers -- though many of these were not technical in nature.

He recently appeared on a US Radio Program : Andrea Rossi with Sterling Allan on Coast to Coast AM

There is some evidence that the Hydrogen/Nickel reaction can become self-sustaining, so the ratio of output to input electrical power would become infinite.

Since the February experiment was reported, Rossi has reportedly PAID the University of Bologna €500,000 to investigate and develop the eCat device, and presumably under a non-disclosure agreement: This is how Rossi is financing his E-cat (this Nyteknik article also gives some background on Rossi). Another Nyteknik interview explores the manufacturing : Cold Fusion: Here's the Greek company building 1 MW

Rossi has stated that NO experimental results will be published for at least a year.

Since many of the original independent observers are now presumed to be under contract to Rossi, some might question their future impartiality. However, as Levi noted:

“If I were an old professor with his career already done, then I would not have anything to risk. But any attempt at fraud on my part would be a terrible personal goal. What could I hope for? To have a title for ten days, and then be thrown from my own department. Because (the matter of) fraud comes up sooner or later. There is no hope for it. So if I ... well, I would be really stupid. Honestly, I would be really stupid!”

5.4. March 2011 Experiment

A new test has been released, with pictures of a smaller 5kW device with and without shielding and insulation.

Swedish physicists on the E-cat: “It’s a nuclear reaction”

“In some way a new kind of physics is taking place. It’s enigmatic, but probably no new laws of nature are involved. We believe it is possible to explain the process with known laws of nature,” said Hanno Essén, associate professor of theoretical physics and a lecturer at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology and chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society.

The new trial was conducted in much the same way as the trial in January, and lasted for nearly six hours. According to observations by Kullander and Essén, a total energy of about 25 kWh was generated.

Experimental test of a mini-Rossi device at the Leonardocorp, Bologna 29 March 2011.

Participants: Giuseppe Levi, David Bianchini, Carlo Leonardi, Hanno Essén, Sven Kullander, Andrea Rossi, Sergio Focardi. Travel report by Hanno Essén and Sven Kullander, 3 April 2011.

Any chemical process for producing 25 kWh from any fuel in a 50 cm3 container can be ruled out. The only alternative explanation is that there is some kind of a nuclear process that gives rise to the measured energy production.

Some additional comments on this experiment are available at Aleklett’s Energy Mix

5.5. Photos

Fig 5 Fig 2 Fig 4 Fig 3

Kullander and Essén report:

During the running we used the rightmost one of the devices, figure 4, which is surrounded by a 2 cm thick lead shield, as stated by Rossi, and wrapped with insulation, figure 5. We had free access to the heater electric supply, to the inlet water hose, to the outlet steam valve and water hose and to the hydrogen gas feed pipe. The total weight of the device was estimated to be around 4 kg.

I read "As stated by Rossi" as "He said so and we believed him" -- not that "he previously stated it and we found it true when we inspected it".

Later in the report they say:

Discussion. Since we do not have access to the internal design of the central fuel container and no information on the external lead shielding and the cooling water system we can only make very general comments.

Nor do they provide a photograph showing the insulation and the lead shield of the horizontal arm.

There is therefore NO proof in the report that the wrapped, horizontal arm contains only equipment identical to the three unwrapped devices.

They DID inspect the vertical arm by unwrapping the insulation (Fig 4), but did NOT inspect the inside of the "chimney".

The complete horizontal arm and the vertical chimney therefore have to be included as "Fake".

They did make one check which WOULD eliminate the Torelli fake (see below).

The 100 °C temperature is reached at 10:42 and at about 10:45 all the water is completely vaporized found by visual checks of the outlet tube ...

However, they do not report that the visual check on the output tube was continuous.

The total volume of the REACTOR was estimated as a sphere::

Reactor Sphere diameter: 7.00 cm
volume: 179.59 cm3 = 0.1796 L

Since the horizontal arm was NOT inspected, I have estimated its volume:

Horizontal Arm : cylinder, length: 30.00 cm diameter: 25.00 cm
volume: 14725.78 cm3 = 14.7258 L

TODO: estimate the volume of the "steam outlet" section.

The things we know about the March apparatus as a whole are:

  • The Control Unit was inspected.
  • The input power to the controller
  • The power from the controller to the eCat was estimated
    (The results would not be significantly changed if ALL the input power were sent to the eCat)
  • The pressure in the hydrogen bottle.
  • The estimated pressure with which the reactor was charged.
  • The input water volume and temperature
  • The output steam temperature and dryness THROUGH THE INSTRUMENT PORT
  • ESTIMATED volume of the Reactor is 0.18 liters (from photos)
  • The volume of the wrapped horizontal arm (from photos)
  • The volume of the vertical chimney (from photos)
  • The mass of the eCat was reported as 4kg -- but it is not clear which parts are included.

The things we do NOT know about the March apparatus include:

  • The amount of Hydrogen used
  • The VOLUME of the REACTOR CHAMBER -- reported by Rossi to be 50cc
  • The weights before and after
  • Whether all the water that went in came out as steam (see Tarallo Water Diversion Fake)
  • The temperature of the output steam flow OUTSIDE of the eCAT
  • Whether any air was taken in by the device, or combustion products released.

The measured values as given in Experimental test of a mini-Rossi device at the Leonardocorp, Bologna 29 March 2011 are:

  • Duration: 5 hours 45 minutes was steam-producing
  • Flow Rate: 6.47 L/Hr
  • Input Power : 300W
  • Excess Power 4.39 kW
  • Factor 4.69/0.3 = 15.6
  • Excess Energy (Excess Power x Run Time): 25.2 kWH
  • Hydrogen: less than 0.1 g of hydrogen was consumed.
    If the hydrogen had been burned it would have produced 0.0157 MJ (0.00437 kWH)

Note: the amount of hydrogen used was NOT measured. They ACCEPTED Rossi's statement that the central chamber was 50cc. The pressure and mass of hydrogen used could have been used to confirm the volume of the central chamber.

Essen and Kullander consider Nickel and Hydrogen forming Nickel Hydride as a possible fake candidate :

The enthalpy from the chemical formation of nickel and hydrogen to nickel hydride is 4850 joule/mol [6].

But taking the fake as 100% nickel, with EXTERNAL hydrogen, gives an energy density of

Energy by volume : 0.736 MJ/L

which is much lower than other candidates, so I have not used it in an "experiment".

I have included the following in the results below:

  • Wrapped Horizontal arm
  • External Reactor Volume
  • Reactor chamber volume reported by Rossi

Because the horizontal arm was NOT inspected "unwrapped", we have to assume it contained FAKE material. The 6 hour test was NOT long enough to eliminate all of the fakes.

5.6. April 2011 Experiment

Two experiments were performed by Mats Lewan : Ny Teknik tested the energy catalyzer.

In the first test on April 19, the national Italian television channel RAI was present and its reportage will be broadcast on the channel RAI News (live streaming here) Thursday, May 5th at 20:35.

In the second test on April 28 only Ny Teknik, the inventor Andrea Rossi, and a colleague of his were present.

The reports are : April 19 (with an eCat similar to the March experiment) and April 28 (with a truncated Chimney.)

Summary: They measured the weight of the input water and hydrogen, the voltage and amperage into the controller, and the input and output temperatures. The output temperature was measured inside the eCat.

The April 19 test produced an excess power of 2.6 kW for 2.167 hours. The April 28 test produced 2.3kW for 2.97 hours. In the April 28 test they observed the output flow at all times, and condensed the output into a bucket.

The control box WAS checked : Mats Lewan, Ny Teknik 2 May 2011 12:55  (via google translate)

One must, of course, measuring the box as it is the total power input we are looking for.

I and all the others before me have inspected the box inside. It contains no batteries or other energy source, just a bit of electronics and the most air.

A Tarallo water-diversion fake is ruled out:

During the April 28 test, we also checked the steam flow through the outlet hose regularly. Some steam was reasonably being condensed back into water in the three-meter-long tube that was exposed to air and was thus at a slightly lower temperature, and a small amount of water was observed coming out of the hose.

There is no evidence that they "unwrapped" the eCATs after the experiment, so for the purpose of this paper the entire body could have contained fake material.

The things we know about the April 28 apparatus as a whole are:

  • The Control Unit was inspected.
  • The input power to the controller
  • The power from the controller to the eCat was estimated by noting the power before and after the resistors were turned on
    (The results would not be significantly changed if ALL the input power were sent to the eCat)
  • The weight of Hydrogen used
  • The input water volume (by weighing) and temperature
  • The output steam temperature THROUGH THE INSTRUMENT PORT
  • ESTIMATED volume of the Reactor is 0.18 liters (from photos)
  • The volume of the wrapped horizontal arm (from photos)
  • The volume of the vertical chimney (from photos)
  • That most the water that went in came out as steam (see Tarallo Water Diversion Fake)

The things we do NOT know about the April apparatus include:

  • The output water volume (although an attempt was made to measure this)
  • The dryness of the steam (only that the thermocouple was not under water).
  • The VOLUME of the REACTOR CHAMBER -- reported by Rossi to be 50cc
  • The weights before and after
  • The temperature of the output steam flow OUTSIDE of the eCAT
  • Whether any air was taken in by the device, or combustion products released.

The measured values are given in April 28

  • Duration: 2 hours 58 minutes was steam-producing
  • Flow Rate: 3.8 L/Hr
  • Input Power : 378 W (including controller)
  • Excess Power 2.3 kW
  • Factor 2.678/0.378 = 7.1
  • Excess Energy (Excess Power x Run Time): 6.83 kWH
  • Hydrogen: 0.3 g of hydrogen was loaded.
    If the hydrogen had been burned it would have produced 0.0429 MJ (0.0119 kWH)

The experimental setup was adequate, but since the eCat was NOT unwrapped the time of the run was NOT long enough to rule out ANY of the chemical fakes. (Only some of the stored-heat fakes are eliminated).

5.7. September 2011 Experiment

Mats Lewan of NyTeknik ran another test on a new Sep 2011 Experiment (according to Rossi, containing multiple reactors), which ran partly in self-sustaining mode.

5.8. Oct 6,2011 Experiment

Again, this used the new "fatcat" first seen in the September test. This eCat DID run in self-sustained mode for an extended period.

It was supposed to eliminate all questions about steam quality by passing the output of the eCat through a heat exchanger to a secondary circuit. From the flow rate and the temperature difference between the input and output (delta-T) the excess heat cacluation should have been unambiguous.

Unfortunately, the thermocouple placement means that the output temperature could have been directly affected by the hot primary circuit.

This is analyzed in a separate document Oct 6 2011 Experiment .

6. Fixed-Energy FAKE eCATS

6.1. Methodology for Fixed-Energy FAKE eCATS and their Detection

As Villa reported:

In the present test, as a precautionary attitude, whatever was not known, not disclosed or not understood has been considered as the energy source.
....
The duration of the tests would be directly proportional to the mass and volume of unknown origin.

The general methodology for Batteries and Chemicals is:

  • Choose some kind of FAKE (eg batteries)
  • Presume that the ENTIRE unknown structure is made up of the Fake material.
  • Make NO allowances for implementation efficiency.
  • Make NO allowance for practicality (the material or combustion products might be fatally toxic: the required equipment would be impossibly small).
  • Use the energy density (by weight or by volume) to determine the MAXIMUM energy content of the fake.
  • Using the observed excess POWER (kW) of the system, determine how long you would have to run it to exhaust the energy.
  • If that time is LESS than the observed run time, then the FAKE is eliminated.

We also estimate the Fake's Feasibility (could it be made) and Concealability (could it escape immediate detection). For example, a fake powered by Batteries is both Feasible and Concealable. One powered by Diesel fuel is Feasible, but since its output fumes would instantly be noticed, it is not Concealable.

Clearly this ranking is subjective, and would be different for different volumes.

For "Unlimited Energy" methods the evaluation as a "black box" becomes more difficult, but generally requires more attention to closing loopholes.

Some kinds of fake could also be detected by analyzing the output:

  • Analyze the chemical composition of the output, to make sure no 'combustion' products are hidden
  • Make sure that all the water which goes IN goes OUT
  • Make all measurements OUTSIDE of the eCAT, so that methods which involve water Diversion are eliminated.
  • Make sure that all the water which goes IN goes OUT
  • Weigh the device before and after, to see whether chemicals have been consumed, or combustion products stored

... but see Rothwell's Razor, below.

Rothwell argues that some kinds of fakes would have been NOTICED by the observers (For example, if Diesel fuel were burned, there would be copious, fatally asphyxiating fumes --- though in the January experiment they could theoretically have been piped out of the room in the steam pipe.). However, this paper takes an extremely conservative position, distinguishing between "not NOTICED" and "tested and NOT FOUND":

  • Anything which is not TESTED must be ruled in favor of the FAKE.

If both the Volume AND the weight are known, then calculate the maximum run time for both, and use the LOWER number.

These calculations assume that the experiment is run at constant power for the duration of the experiment, although during the February test there were reports that it produced 130 kW for short periods. In this case one would compare the total energy output of the fake and the measured values : it is not as easy to predict the time required to eliminate the fake.

If all fakes are eliminated, then, As Sherlock Holmes said -- again and again -- this time in The Sign of the Four:

“You will not apply my precept,” he said, shaking his head. “How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?

6.2. Organization for Fixed-Energy Fakes

First, we define the Equipment Sections, giving the weight and volume.

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Section Name 1SEC-111.00012.000
Section Name 2SEC-221.00022.000
Section Name 3SEC-331.00032.000

Then we define various "Fake Materials" which could be used.

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
Material 0MAT-012.300 3.41745.60012.667UUUnknown-Unknown 
Material 1MAT-112.300 3.41745.60012.667YYFeasible-Concealable 
Material 2MAT-212.300 3.41745.60012.667YNFeasible-NOT Concealable 
Material 3MAT-312.300 3.41745.60012.667NYNOT Feasible-Concealable 
Material 4MAT-412.300 3.41745.60012.667NNNOT Feasible-NOT Concealable 

The column headed "FC" represents an estimate of the Fake's Feasibility (could it be made) and Concealability (could it escape immediate detection).

Finally, we construct "Experiments", in which we put various materials in the sections of the unit (presently fixed at three sections), note the POWER that the experiment produced, and the TIME it ran for.

We calculate and add up the total ENERGY that the sections could contain, and calculate how long the FAKE could run at the observed POWER level.

If the FAKE could run LONGER than the actual experiment, then it is NOT eliminated.

If the FAKE only runs SHORTER than the actual experiment, then it is ELIMINATED.

Experiment 1 : All sections contain MAT-1
Section SEC-1 SEC-2 SEC-3 Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material MAT-1 MAT-2 MAT-3 Fake Expt
Energy 152  kWH 279  kWH 405  kWH 836  kWH 10.0  kW 83.6  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
Fake can run longer than the experiment: fake is NOT eliminated

Experiment 2 : Only SEC-2 contain MAT-1
Section SEC-1 SEC-2 SEC-3 Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - MAT-1 - Fake Expt
Energy 279  kWH 279  kWH 16.0  kW 17.4  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
Fake cannot run as long as the experiment -- Fake is eliminated

6.3. Equipment Sections

6.3.1. January-February

6.3.1.1 Control Box

Villa reported the volume as 60 liters.
In January Levi reported its weight as "a few kg".
In February Levi looked inside the control box, and reports its weight as 7 kg

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Control BoxCtrl 7.00060.000

6.3.1.2 Horizontal Arm

The weight is unknown -- estimated by Villa as 30 kg
Villa reported the volume as 22 liters.
Levi reported in February that much of the volume is insulation.

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Horizontal ArmHorz-22.000

6.3.1.3 Vertical Arm

The weight is unknown.
Villa reported the volume as 9 liters.
Levi reported in February that there are no hidden components.

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Vertical ArmVert- 9.000

6.3.1.4 Reactor

In February Levi reported:

  • The mass of the reactor is 30 kg, and that most of that is lead.
  • The volume of the Reactor CHAMBER is 1 liter, but did not give not the volume of the REACTOR as a whole.

Pending further information, this paper ASSUMES that the volume of the reactor as a whole is HALF the volume of the Horizontal Arm

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
ReactorReact30.00011.000
Reactor ChamberChamber- 1.000

6.3.2. March Components

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Horizontal ArmHorz-14.726
Vertical ArmVert--
ReactorReact- 0.180
Reactor ChamberChamber- 0.050

6.3.3. April Components

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Horizontal ArmHorz-14.726
Vertical ArmVert--
ReactorReact- 0.180
Reactor ChamberChamber- 0.050

6.3.4. September Components

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Total UnitTotal-90.000
Vertical ArmVert--
ReactorReact-90.000
Reactor ChamberChamber- 0.050

6.3.5. October Components

Section Abrev Mass Volume
kg L
Total UnitTotal-105.000
Vertical ArmVert--
ReactorReact-60.000
Reactor ChamberChamber- 0.050

6.4. Materials: Batteries and Chemicals

This section describes various techniques and materials which could be possibly used to construct a fake.

The materials are selected from Wikipedia Energy Density
(Unfortunately not all entries give the Energy by volume AND by weight.)

The Wiki table gives the Energy Density for some materials, assuming that oxygen is obtained from an external source. If the oxidant also has to be stored, then the Energy Density is reduced in proportion to the mass or volume of the two components. These calculations are shown in a separate section.

The materials selected represent the highest efficiency for any class.

These all have the characteristic that they contain a fixed amount of energy, and can therefore only run for a limited time. A fake made from batteries or chemicals simply has to be run for long enough to exhaust the material.

Batteries could be contained in the Control Box, and in the Main Unit.

6.4.1. Lithium Ion Batteries

Lithium-Ion batteries are listed as the most efficient by volume.

(Lead-Acid batteries are listed for comparison.)

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
Lead-Acid BatteriesLead B 0.140 0.039 0.360 0.100YYFeasible and Concealable 
Lithium-Ion BatteriesL-i B 0.720 0.200 3.600 1.000YYFeasible and Concealable 

Lithium-Sodium batteries are listed as a higher Energy Density by Mass -- but the volume is not given.

6.4.2. Hydrogen Fuel Cell

This method uses a Hydrogen Fuel Cell, which could deliver electric power from the Control Box to the Main Unit.

It could use compressed or liquid Hydrogen, in conjunction with external air, compressed Oxygen or liquid oxygen.

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel CellCH/Air-FC143.00039.723 5.600 1.556YYAir-intake might not be concealable 
Liquid Hydrogen/External Air Fuel CellLH/Air-FC143.00039.72310.100 2.806NYLiquid gas is rated as NOT feasible 
Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen Fuel CellCH/CO-FC15.990 4.442 3.734 1.037YYFeasible and Concealable 
Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen Fuel CellLH/LO-FC15.990 4.442 3.748 1.041NYLiquid gas is rated as NOT feasible 

Comments : the by-product is water, which could be vented, or, if burned with oxygen, condensed and stored.

6.4.3. Hydrogen burned with Air or Oxygen

This could be used in the main unit only.

This method burns compressed or liquid Hydrogen with external air, compressed Oxygen or Liquid Oxygen

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
Compressed Hydrogen/External AirCH/Air143.00039.723 5.600 1.556YYAir intake might not be concealable 
Liquid Hydrogen/External AirLH/Air143.00039.72310.100 2.806NYLiquid gas is rated as NOT feasible 
Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed OxygenCH/CO15.990 4.442 3.734 1.037YYFeasible and Concealable 
Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid OxygenLH/LO15.990 4.442 3.748 1.041NYLiquid gas is rated as NOT feasible 

Comments : the by-product is water, which could be vented into the outlet, or, if burned with oxygen, condensed and stored.

6.4.4. Diesel burned with Air

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
Diesel/AirDsl/Air46.20012.83337.30010.361YNAir intake and fumes make it not concealable 

The Wiki Energy density table indicates that diesel has a slightly higher energy content than gasoline.

Diesel or Gasoline would produce large quantities of fumes, which would be very hard to hide from observers. It might be possible to vent it into the steam outlet.

6.4.5. Boron burned with Air or Oxygen

This method uses Boron, burned with external air, compressed Oxygen or Liquid Oxygen, forming solid Boron Trioxide, which can remain in the unit.

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
Boron/External AirB/Air58.90016.361137.80038.278NYProbably not feasible, air-intake might not be concealable 
Boron/Compressed OxygenB/CO18.293 5.08116.131 4.481NYProbably not feasible 
Boron/Liquid OxygenB/LO18.293 5.08123.345 6.485NYLiquid gas is rated as NOT feasible 

Boron is hard to ignite in air. Even in Oxygen it has to be raised to a high temperature. It is not clear whether non-toxic, glassy Boron Trioxide is formed by burning, or whether toxic BO and BO2 compounds are formed.

It might only be feasible to burn powdered Boron : we assume that solid Boron is used.

6.4.6. Aluminum burned with Air or Oxygen

This method uses Aluminum, burned with external air, compressed Oxygen or Liquid Oxygen, forming oxides, which can remain in the unit.

Aluminum is easier to ignite than Boron.

Its energy density is less than Boron, so it would be easier to detect. As with Boron, it might only burn in powdered form.

6.4.7. Beryllium burned with Air or Oxygen

This method uses Beryllium, burned with external air, compressed Oxygen or Liquid Oxygen, forming oxides, which can remain in the unit.

Beryllium is easier to ignite than Boron, but both Beryllium and its combustion products are extremely toxic.

6.4.8. Magnesium and Steam

Reactions of Metals and Water

Magnesium combines with STEAM to produce Magnesium Oxide and Hydrogen.

Mg + H2O ==> MgO + H2

The hydrogen can then be burned with Air or Oxygen to produce water.

An initial amount of water can be boiled using the internal resistors, and then the resultant steam can be recycled.

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
Magnesium/Steam/AirMg/Steam24.884 6.91243.24812.013NYProbably not feasible, Air intake detectable 
Mg/Steam/O2Mg/Steam/O214.930 4.14721.581 5.995NYProbably not feasible 

6.4.9. Explosives or Thermite

One might expect that Explosives would contain a lot of energy. In fact, most of them do not. For instance, Nitroglycerine only contains 10 MJ/L, compared to Boron/External Air, which has 138 MJ/L. They just release their energy very quickly.

Thermite has also been suggested, but its energy density of 10MJ/L is lower than other materials considered here, and it is hard to stop the reaction.

6.4.10. Compressed or Liquid Hydrogen and Oxygen

These ABSORB energy when decompressed or evaporated. It is presumed that this is obtained from the ambient air.

6.4.11. Previously Unknown Chemical Reactions

Rossi has indicated that the reactor chamber has to be re-charged every six months.

A chemical reaction which can produce 10kW for 18 hours (let alone 6 months) would be as big a break-through in Chemistry as a LENR device would be in Physics.

6.4.12. Other suggested fakes (Pending analysis)

This section lists fakes which have been suggested by readers, but which have not yet been evaluated.

  • Krzysztof Dydak : The reactor could contain Raney Nickel/air fuel cell fed with hydrazine dissolved in water with caustic.

6.5. Materials: Other Fixed-Energy Methods

6.5.1. Pre-loaded Heat Sink

Proposed By : Rothwell (Rossi credibility)

The entire volume is composed of a material with high specific heat.

See Heat capacity, which has an entry for Volumetric Heat Capacity J·cm−3·K−1

Material Specific
Heat
Maximum
Temperature
Minimum
Temperature
MJ/
Liter
Comments
Water 4.21 100 14 0.36206 Boils
Be 3.38 1287 14 4.30274 Melts. Poisonous
Iron 3.53 1538 14 5.37972 Melts
Lead 1.44 327.46 14 0.4513824 Melts

Beryllium and Iron are selected for their high specific heat values. Water and lead are included because they are known to be constituents of the main unit.

Note : Dec 15, 2011 -- I need to add phase-change salts to this list. The upper temperature would be determined by the containing structure and/or heating apparatus.

These values are loaded into a material table:

Material Abrev Energy
by Mass
Energy
by Volume
FC Comment
MJ/kg kWH/kg MJ/L kWH/L
SPH WaterSPH Water-- 0.362 0.101YYFrom SPH Table 
SPH BeSPH Be-- 4.303 1.195NNFrom SPH Table 
SPH IronSPH Iron-- 5.380 1.494NNFrom SPH Table 
SPH LeadSPH Lead-- 0.451 0.125YYFrom SPH Table 

Note that the heat capacity might also explain "heat after death", when the output power continues after the inputs are turned off.

This fake must be entirely contained in the main body of the apparatus.

The upper temperatures are set to the boiling point of water, or for other materials, their melting point.

6.5.2. Input Water Diverted into Storage

Proposed by : Rothwell Vortex and Vortex

The water which is pumped INTO the system is NOT all sent into the heat exchanger, but some is diverted into storage.

The volume of the machine is much smaller than the 18 liters of water injected into it over the course of an hour. There is no place inside it to hide the water. The fact that it is a black box does not reduce the certainty of this particular factor in any way.

He said he did not look at the end of the hose in the sink in the bathroom, but he did note that it was making a lot of noise from steam. I think any noise rules out the "diverted water stream" hypothesis. It is a distinct noise, after all, and a flow of 0.3 L per minute of warm water makes no noise at all at the end of the hose.

For example, if the observed output power is 10 times the input power, and only 1/10 the water is converted to steam then the apparent output will be FAKE. It can run until the diverted 9/10 of the water fills the reservoir.

As an UPPER limit, presume that the ENTIRE flow is diverted. (The actual required diversion is related to the power factor).

Maximum run time = volume / flow_rate

  Sections Volume
(liters)
Flow
(liters/hr)
Time
to
Fill (Hrs)
Time
of
Expt (Hrs)
Real
or
Fake?
Jan Horz and Vert 31.00 17.50 1.77 0.50 FAKE?
Feb Horz 22.00 3000.00 0.01 18.00 REAL
Mar Horz 14.73 6.47 2.28 5.75 REAL
Apr Horz 14.73 3.80 3.88 2.97 FAKE?

6.6. Limited-Energy Theoretical Experiments -- FAKES by VOLUME

For each type of fake, various "experiments" are defined, with individual sections loaded with fake materials.

For each combination of materials, a number of experiments are evaluated:

  • The January Power and Duration, with ALL sections, including the Control Box, filled with fake material
  • The January Power and Duration, with the Main Unit filled with fake material. Levi's statement that the control box "weighed a few kg" and therefore cannot contain fake material, is accepted.
  • The February Power and Duration, with the Horizontal Arm filled with fake material. Levi's statements about the control box and the vertical arm are accepted.
  • The February Power and Duration, with an ESTIMATE of the volume of the whole reactor.
  • The March Power and Duration, with the Horizontal Arm filled with fake material.
  • The March Power and Duration, with an ESTIMATE of the volume of the whole reactor.
  • TODO : update list

6.6.1. Lithium Ion Batteries

Control Box: Lithium-Ion Batteries Main Unit: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material L-i B L-i B L-i B Fake Expt
Energy 60.0  kWH 22.0  kWH 9.00  kWH 91.0  kWH 10.0  kW 9.10  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - L-i B L-i B Fake Expt
Energy 22.0  kWH 9.00  kWH 31.0  kWH 10.0  kW 3.10  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - L-i B - Fake Expt
Energy 22.0  kWH 22.0  kWH 16.0  kW 1.38  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - L-i B - Fake Expt
Energy 11.0  kWH 11.0  kWH 16.0  kW 0.688  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - L-i B - Fake Expt
Energy 1.00  kWH 1.00  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0625  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material L-i B - - Fake Expt
Energy 14.7  kWH 14.7  kWH 4.39  kW 3.35  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - L-i B - Fake Expt
Energy 0.180  kWH 0.180  kWH 4.39  kW 0.0409  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material L-i B - - Fake Expt
Energy 14.7  kWH 14.7  kWH 2.30  kW 6.40  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material L-i B - - Fake Expt
Energy 90.0  kWH 90.0  kWH 2.03  kW 44.3  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material L-i B - - Fake Expt
Energy 105  kWH 105  kWH 3.12  kW 33.6  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - L-i B - Fake Expt
Energy 60.0  kWH 60.0  kWH 3.12  kW 19.2  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material L-i B - - Fake Expt
Energy 105  kWH 105  kWH 3.12  kW 33.6  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Lithium-Ion Batteries
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - L-i B - Fake Expt
Energy 1.60  kWH 1.60  kWH 3.12  kW 0.512  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.2. Hydrogen

Controller contains a Hydrogen Fuel Cell, Main unit burns Hydrogen.

Liquid Hydrogen and external Air are the most favorable for a fake.

Control Box: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/Air-FC LH/Air LH/Air Fake Expt
Energy 168  kWH 61.7  kWH 25.3  kWH 255  kWH 10.0  kW 25.5  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - LH/Air LH/Air Fake Expt
Energy 61.7  kWH 25.3  kWH 87.0  kWH 10.0  kW 8.70  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 61.7  kWH 61.7  kWH 16.0  kW 3.86  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 30.9  kWH 30.9  kWH 16.0  kW 1.93  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 2.81  kWH 2.81  kWH 16.0  kW 0.175  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 41.3  kWH 41.3  kWH 4.39  kW 9.41  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 0.504  kWH 0.504  kWH 4.39  kW 0.115  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 41.3  kWH 41.3  kWH 2.30  kW 18.0  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 253  kWH 253  kWH 2.03  kW 124  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 295  kWH 295  kWH 3.12  kW 94.3  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - LH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 168  kWH 168  kWH 3.12  kW 53.9  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 295  kWH 295  kWH 3.12  kW 94.3  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Liquid Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 4.49  kWH 4.49  kWH 3.12  kW 1.44  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

Compressed Hydrogen, External Air

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC CH/Air CH/Air Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 34.2  kWH 14.0  kWH 142  kWH 10.0  kW 14.2  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - CH/Air CH/Air Fake Expt
Energy 34.2  kWH 14.0  kWH 48.2  kWH 10.0  kW 4.82  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 34.2  kWH 34.2  kWH 16.0  kW 2.14  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 17.1  kWH 17.1  kWH 16.0  kW 1.07  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 1.56  kWH 1.56  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0972  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 22.9  kWH 22.9  kWH 4.39  kW 5.22  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 0.279  kWH 0.279  kWH 4.39  kW 0.0636  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 22.9  kWH 22.9  kWH 2.30  kW 9.96  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 140  kWH 140  kWH 2.03  kW 69.0  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 163  kWH 163  kWH 3.12  kW 52.3  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 93.3  kWH 3.12  kW 29.9  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 163  kWH 163  kWH 3.12  kW 52.3  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 2.49  kWH 2.49  kWH 3.12  kW 0.796  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

Compressed Hydrogen, Compressed Oxygen

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen Fuel Cell Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/CO-FC CH/CO CH/CO Fake Expt
Energy 62.2  kWH 22.8  kWH 9.34  kWH 94.4  kWH 10.0  kW 9.44  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - CH/CO CH/CO Fake Expt
Energy 22.8  kWH 9.34  kWH 32.2  kWH 10.0  kW 3.22  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 22.8  kWH 22.8  kWH 16.0  kW 1.43  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 11.4  kWH 11.4  kWH 16.0  kW 0.713  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 1.04  kWH 1.04  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0648  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material CH/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 15.3  kWH 15.3  kWH 4.39  kW 3.48  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 0.186  kWH 0.186  kWH 4.39  kW 0.0424  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 15.3  kWH 15.3  kWH 2.30  kW 6.64  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 93.4  kWH 93.4  kWH 2.03  kW 46.0  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 109  kWH 109  kWH 3.12  kW 34.9  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - CH/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 62.2  kWH 62.2  kWH 3.12  kW 19.9  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 109  kWH 109  kWH 3.12  kW 34.9  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Compressed Hydrogen/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 1.66  kWH 1.66  kWH 3.12  kW 0.531  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

Liquid Hydrogen, Liquid Oxygen

Control Box: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen Fuel Cell Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/LO-FC LH/LO LH/LO Fake Expt
Energy 62.5  kWH 22.9  kWH 9.37  kWH 94.7  kWH 10.0  kW 9.47  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - LH/LO LH/LO Fake Expt
Energy 22.9  kWH 9.37  kWH 32.3  kWH 10.0  kW 3.23  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 22.9  kWH 22.9  kWH 16.0  kW 1.43  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 11.5  kWH 11.5  kWH 16.0  kW 0.716  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 1.04  kWH 1.04  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0651  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material LH/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 15.3  kWH 15.3  kWH 4.39  kW 3.49  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 0.187  kWH 0.187  kWH 4.39  kW 0.0426  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 15.3  kWH 15.3  kWH 2.30  kW 6.67  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 93.7  kWH 93.7  kWH 2.03  kW 46.2  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 109  kWH 109  kWH 3.12  kW 35.0  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - LH/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 62.5  kWH 62.5  kWH 3.12  kW 20.0  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material LH/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 109  kWH 109  kWH 3.12  kW 35.0  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - LH/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 1.67  kWH 1.67  kWH 3.12  kW 0.533  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.3. Diesel Fuel

Controller contains a Hydrogen Fuel Cell, Main unit burns Diesel.

For both, external Air is the most favorable for a fake.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Diesel/Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material CH/Air-FC Dsl/Air Dsl/Air Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 228  kWH 93.3  kWH 415  kWH 10.0  kW 41.5  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Diesel/Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material - Dsl/Air Dsl/Air Fake Expt
Energy 228  kWH 93.3  kWH 321  kWH 10.0  kW 32.1  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Diesel/Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Dsl/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 228  kWH 228  kWH 16.0  kW 14.2  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Diesel/Air
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Dsl/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 114  kWH 114  kWH 16.0  kW 7.12  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Diesel/Air
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Dsl/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 10.4  kWH 10.4  kWH 16.0  kW 0.648  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Diesel/Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material Dsl/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 153  kWH 153  kWH 4.39  kW 34.8  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Diesel/Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Dsl/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 1.86  kWH 1.86  kWH 4.39  kW 0.424  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Diesel/Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material Dsl/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 153  kWH 153  kWH 2.30  kW 66.3  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Diesel/Air
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material Dsl/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 933  kWH 933  kWH 2.03  kW 459  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Diesel/Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material Dsl/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 1088  kWH 1088  kWH 3.12  kW 348  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Diesel/Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material - Dsl/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 622  kWH 622  kWH 3.12  kW 199  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Diesel/Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material Dsl/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 1088  kWH 1088  kWH 3.12  kW 348  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Diesel/Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Unconcealable)
Material - Dsl/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 16.6  kWH 16.6  kWH 3.12  kW 5.30  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.4. Boron and Air or Oxygen

Controller contains a Hydrogen Fuel Cell (Liquid Hydrogen/Air), Main unit burns Boron with Air.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC B/Air B/Air Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 842  kWH 345  kWH 1280  kWH 10.0  kW 128  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air B/Air Fake Expt
Energy 842  kWH 345  kWH 1187  kWH 10.0  kW 119  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 842  kWH 842  kWH 16.0  kW 52.6  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 421  kWH 421  kWH 16.0  kW 26.3  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 38.3  kWH 38.3  kWH 16.0  kW 2.39  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 564  kWH 564  kWH 4.39  kW 128  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Boron/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 6.87  kWH 6.87  kWH 4.39  kW 1.57  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 564  kWH 564  kWH 2.30  kW 245  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 3445  kWH 3445  kWH 2.03  kW 1697  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 4019  kWH 4019  kWH 3.12  kW 1286  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 2297  kWH 2297  kWH 3.12  kW 735  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Boron/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 4019  kWH 4019  kWH 3.12  kW 1286  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Boron/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 61.2  kWH 61.2  kWH 3.12  kW 19.6  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

Controller contains a Hydrogen Fuel Cell (Liquid Hydrogen/Air), Main unit burns Boron with Compressed Oxygen.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC B/CO B/CO Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 98.6  kWH 40.3  kWH 232  kWH 10.0  kW 23.2  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/CO B/CO Fake Expt
Energy 98.6  kWH 40.3  kWH 139  kWH 10.0  kW 13.9  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 98.6  kWH 98.6  kWH 16.0  kW 6.16  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 49.3  kWH 49.3  kWH 16.0  kW 3.08  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 4.48  kWH 4.48  kWH 16.0  kW 0.280  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 66.0  kWH 66.0  kWH 4.39  kW 15.0  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 0.805  kWH 0.805  kWH 4.39  kW 0.183  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 66.0  kWH 66.0  kWH 2.30  kW 28.7  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 403  kWH 403  kWH 2.03  kW 199  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 470  kWH 470  kWH 3.12  kW 151  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 269  kWH 269  kWH 3.12  kW 86.0  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/CO - - Fake Expt
Energy 470  kWH 470  kWH 3.12  kW 151  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Boron/Compressed Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/CO - Fake Expt
Energy 7.17  kWH 7.17  kWH 3.12  kW 2.29  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

Controller contains a Hydrogen Fuel Cell (Liquid Hydrogen/Air), Main unit burns Boron with Liquid Oxygen.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC B/LO B/LO Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 143  kWH 58.4  kWH 294  kWH 10.0  kW 29.4  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/LO B/LO Fake Expt
Energy 143  kWH 58.4  kWH 201  kWH 10.0  kW 20.1  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 143  kWH 143  kWH 16.0  kW 8.92  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 71.3  kWH 71.3  kWH 16.0  kW 4.46  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 6.48  kWH 6.48  kWH 16.0  kW 0.405  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 95.5  kWH 95.5  kWH 4.39  kW 21.8  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 1.16  kWH 1.16  kWH 4.39  kW 0.265  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 95.5  kWH 95.5  kWH 2.30  kW 41.5  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 584  kWH 584  kWH 2.03  kW 288  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 681  kWH 681  kWH 3.12  kW 218  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 389  kWH 389  kWH 3.12  kW 125  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/LO - - Fake Expt
Energy 681  kWH 681  kWH 3.12  kW 218  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Boron/Liquid Oxygen
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/LO - Fake Expt
Energy 10.4  kWH 10.4  kWH 3.12  kW 3.32  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.5. Magnesium and Steam

Controller contains a Hydrogen Fuel Cell (Liquid Hydrogen/Air), Main unit burns Magnesium in Steam, producing Hydrogen, which is burned with external Air.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC Mg/Steam Mg/Steam Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 264  kWH 108  kWH 466  kWH 10.0  kW 46.6  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - Mg/Steam Mg/Steam Fake Expt
Energy 264  kWH 108  kWH 372  kWH 10.0  kW 37.2  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam - Fake Expt
Energy 264  kWH 264  kWH 16.0  kW 16.5  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam - Fake Expt
Energy 132  kWH 132  kWH 16.0  kW 8.26  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam - Fake Expt
Energy 12.0  kWH 12.0  kWH 16.0  kW 0.751  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam - - Fake Expt
Energy 177  kWH 177  kWH 4.39  kW 40.3  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam - Fake Expt
Energy 2.16  kWH 2.16  kWH 4.39  kW 0.491  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam - - Fake Expt
Energy 177  kWH 177  kWH 2.30  kW 76.9  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam - - Fake Expt
Energy 1081  kWH 1081  kWH 2.03  kW 533  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam - - Fake Expt
Energy 1261  kWH 1261  kWH 3.12  kW 404  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - Mg/Steam - Fake Expt
Energy 721  kWH 721  kWH 3.12  kW 231  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam - - Fake Expt
Energy 1261  kWH 1261  kWH 3.12  kW 404  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Magnesium/Steam/Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - Mg/Steam - Fake Expt
Energy 19.2  kWH 19.2  kWH 3.12  kW 6.15  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

Magnesium and Steam, with the resulting hydrogen burned with compressed oxygen

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC Mg/Steam/O2 Mg/Steam/O2 Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 132  kWH 54.0  kWH 279  kWH 10.0  kW 27.9  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - Mg/Steam/O2 Mg/Steam/O2 Fake Expt
Energy 132  kWH 54.0  kWH 186  kWH 10.0  kW 18.6  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam/O2 - Fake Expt
Energy 132  kWH 132  kWH 16.0  kW 8.24  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam/O2 - Fake Expt
Energy 65.9  kWH 65.9  kWH 16.0  kW 4.12  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam/O2 - Fake Expt
Energy 5.99  kWH 5.99  kWH 16.0  kW 0.375  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam/O2 - - Fake Expt
Energy 88.3  kWH 88.3  kWH 4.39  kW 20.1  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam/O2 - Fake Expt
Energy 1.08  kWH 1.08  kWH 4.39  kW 0.245  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam/O2 - - Fake Expt
Energy 88.3  kWH 88.3  kWH 2.30  kW 38.4  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam/O2 - - Fake Expt
Energy 540  kWH 540  kWH 2.03  kW 266  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam/O2 - - Fake Expt
Energy 629  kWH 629  kWH 3.12  kW 201  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Mg/Steam/O2
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - Mg/Steam/O2 - Fake Expt
Energy 360  kWH 360  kWH 3.12  kW 115  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Mg/Steam/O2
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material Mg/Steam/O2 - - Fake Expt
Energy 629  kWH 629  kWH 3.12  kW 201  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Mg/Steam/O2
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - Mg/Steam/O2 - Fake Expt
Energy 9.59  kWH 9.59  kWH 3.12  kW 3.07  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.6. Water Heat Sink

The entire volume of the main unit is a water heat sink. Note that this cannot BOIL the water for the January experiment.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: SPH Water
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC SPH Water SPH Water Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 2.21  kWH 0.905  kWH 96.5  kWH 10.0  kW 9.65  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: SPH Water
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Water SPH Water Fake Expt
Energy 2.21  kWH 0.905  kWH 3.12  kWH 10.0  kW 0.312  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: SPH Water
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Water - Fake Expt
Energy 2.21  kWH 2.21  kWH 16.0  kW 0.138  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: SPH Water
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Water - Fake Expt
Energy 1.11  kWH 1.11  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0691  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: SPH Water
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Water - Fake Expt
Energy 0.101  kWH 0.101  kWH 16.0  kW 0.00629  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Water
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Water - - Fake Expt
Energy 1.48  kWH 1.48  kWH 4.39  kW 0.337  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: SPH Water
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Water - Fake Expt
Energy 0.0181  kWH 0.0181  kWH 4.39  kW 0.00411  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Water
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Water - - Fake Expt
Energy 1.48  kWH 1.48  kWH 2.30  kW 0.644  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: SPH Water
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material SPH Water - - Fake Expt
Energy 9.05  kWH 9.05  kWH 2.03  kW 4.46  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: SPH Water
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Water - - Fake Expt
Energy 10.6  kWH 10.6  kWH 3.12  kW 3.38  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: SPH Water
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Water - Fake Expt
Energy 6.03  kWH 6.03  kWH 3.12  kW 1.93  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : SPH Water
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Water - - Fake Expt
Energy 10.6  kWH 10.6  kWH 3.12  kW 3.38  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : SPH Water
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Water - Fake Expt
Energy 0.161  kWH 0.161  kWH 3.12  kW 0.0515  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.7. Beryllium Heat Sink

The entire volume of the main unit is a Beryllium Heat Sink ... pre-heated to its melting point.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: SPH Be
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material CH/Air-FC SPH Be SPH Be Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 26.3  kWH 10.8  kWH 130  kWH 10.0  kW 13.0  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: SPH Be
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material - SPH Be SPH Be Fake Expt
Energy 26.3  kWH 10.8  kWH 37.1  kWH 10.0  kW 3.71  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: SPH Be
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Be - Fake Expt
Energy 26.3  kWH 26.3  kWH 16.0  kW 1.64  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: SPH Be
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Be - Fake Expt
Energy 13.1  kWH 13.1  kWH 16.0  kW 0.822  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: SPH Be
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Be - Fake Expt
Energy 1.20  kWH 1.20  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0747  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Be
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Be - - Fake Expt
Energy 17.6  kWH 17.6  kWH 4.39  kW 4.01  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: SPH Be
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Be - Fake Expt
Energy 0.215  kWH 0.215  kWH 4.39  kW 0.0489  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Be
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Be - - Fake Expt
Energy 17.6  kWH 17.6  kWH 2.30  kW 7.65  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: SPH Be
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Be - - Fake Expt
Energy 108  kWH 108  kWH 2.03  kW 53.0  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: SPH Be
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Be - - Fake Expt
Energy 125  kWH 125  kWH 3.12  kW 40.2  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: SPH Be
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material - SPH Be - Fake Expt
Energy 71.7  kWH 71.7  kWH 3.12  kW 22.9  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : SPH Be
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Be - - Fake Expt
Energy 125  kWH 125  kWH 3.12  kW 40.2  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : SPH Be
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Be - Fake Expt
Energy 1.91  kWH 1.91  kWH 3.12  kW 0.612  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.8. Iron Heat Sink

The entire volume of the main unit is an Iron Heat Sink ... pre-heated to its melting point.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: SPH Iron
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material CH/Air-FC SPH Iron SPH Iron Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 32.9  kWH 13.4  kWH 140  kWH 10.0  kW 14.0  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: SPH Iron
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material - SPH Iron SPH Iron Fake Expt
Energy 32.9  kWH 13.4  kWH 46.3  kWH 10.0  kW 4.63  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: SPH Iron
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Iron - Fake Expt
Energy 32.9  kWH 32.9  kWH 16.0  kW 2.05  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: SPH Iron
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Iron - Fake Expt
Energy 16.4  kWH 16.4  kWH 16.0  kW 1.03  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: SPH Iron
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Iron - Fake Expt
Energy 1.49  kWH 1.49  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0934  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Iron
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Iron - - Fake Expt
Energy 22.0  kWH 22.0  kWH 4.39  kW 5.01  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: SPH Iron
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Iron - Fake Expt
Energy 0.268  kWH 0.268  kWH 4.39  kW 0.0611  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Iron
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Iron - - Fake Expt
Energy 22.0  kWH 22.0  kWH 2.30  kW 9.57  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: SPH Iron
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Iron - - Fake Expt
Energy 134  kWH 134  kWH 2.03  kW 66.3  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: SPH Iron
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Iron - - Fake Expt
Energy 157  kWH 157  kWH 3.12  kW 50.2  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: SPH Iron
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material - SPH Iron - Fake Expt
Energy 89.7  kWH 89.7  kWH 3.12  kW 28.7  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : SPH Iron
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Unconcealable)
Material SPH Iron - - Fake Expt
Energy 157  kWH 157  kWH 3.12  kW 50.2  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : SPH Iron
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Iron - Fake Expt
Energy 2.39  kWH 2.39  kWH 3.12  kW 0.765  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.9. Lead Heat Sink

The entire volume of the main unit is an Lead Heat Sink ... pre-heated to its melting point.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: SPH Lead
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC SPH Lead SPH Lead Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 2.76  kWH 1.13  kWH 97.2  kWH 10.0  kW 9.72  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: SPH Lead
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Lead SPH Lead Fake Expt
Energy 2.76  kWH 1.13  kWH 3.89  kWH 10.0  kW 0.389  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: SPH Lead
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Lead - Fake Expt
Energy 2.76  kWH 2.76  kWH 16.0  kW 0.172  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: SPH Lead
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Lead - Fake Expt
Energy 1.38  kWH 1.38  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0862  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: SPH Lead
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Lead - Fake Expt
Energy 0.125  kWH 0.125  kWH 16.0  kW 0.00784  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Lead
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Lead - - Fake Expt
Energy 1.85  kWH 1.85  kWH 4.39  kW 0.421  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: SPH Lead
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Lead - Fake Expt
Energy 0.0225  kWH 0.0225  kWH 4.39  kW 0.00513  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: SPH Lead
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material SPH Lead - - Fake Expt
Energy 1.85  kWH 1.85  kWH 2.30  kW 0.803  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: SPH Lead
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material SPH Lead - - Fake Expt
Energy 11.3  kWH 11.3  kWH 2.03  kW 5.56  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: SPH Lead
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material SPH Lead - - Fake Expt
Energy 13.2  kWH 13.2  kWH 3.12  kW 4.21  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: SPH Lead
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Lead - Fake Expt
Energy 7.52  kWH 7.52  kWH 3.12  kW 2.41  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : SPH Lead
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material SPH Lead - - Fake Expt
Energy 13.2  kWH 13.2  kWH 3.12  kW 4.21  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : SPH Lead
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - SPH Lead - Fake Expt
Energy 0.201  kWH 0.201  kWH 3.12  kW 0.0642  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.10. Most Plausible Fake for Experiments

This section lists the most plausible (Feasability,Concealability) fake for each experiment.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC CH/Air CH/Air Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 34.2  kWH 14.0  kWH 142  kWH 10.0  kW 14.2  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - CH/Air CH/Air Fake Expt
Energy 34.2  kWH 14.0  kWH 48.2  kWH 10.0  kW 4.82  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 34.2  kWH 34.2  kWH 16.0  kW 2.14  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 17.1  kWH 17.1  kWH 16.0  kW 1.07  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 1.56  kWH 1.56  kWH 16.0  kW 0.0972  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 22.9  kWH 22.9  kWH 4.39  kW 5.22  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 0.279  kWH 0.279  kWH 4.39  kW 0.0636  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 22.9  kWH 22.9  kWH 2.30  kW 9.96  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 140  kWH 140  kWH 2.03  kW 69.0  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 163  kWH 163  kWH 3.12  kW 52.3  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 93.3  kWH 3.12  kW 29.9  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Feasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 163  kWH 163  kWH 3.12  kW 52.3  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Compressed Hydrogen/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - CH/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 2.49  kWH 2.49  kWH 3.12  kW 0.796  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.6.11. Longest-running Fake for Experiments

This section lists the longest-running fake (ignoring Feasability,Concealability) for each experiment.

Control Box: Compressed Hydrogen/External Air Fuel Cell Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material CH/Air-FC B/Air B/Air Fake Expt
Energy 93.3  kWH 842  kWH 345  kWH 1280  kWH 10.0  kW 128  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with ALL sections
Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air B/Air Fake Expt
Energy 842  kWH 345  kWH 1187  kWH 10.0  kW 119  Hrs 0.500  Hrs
January with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Horizontal Arm: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Horz Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 842  kWH 842  kWH 16.0  kW 52.6  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with HORIZONTAL unit
Estimated Reactor: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 421  kWH 421  kWH 16.0  kW 26.3  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Reactor Chamber: Boron/External Air
Section Ctrl Chamber Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 38.3  kWH 38.3  kWH 16.0  kW 2.39  Hrs 18.0  Hrs
February with reactor CHAMBER volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 564  kWH 564  kWH 4.39  kW 128  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with HORIZONTAL unit
Reactor: Boron/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
REAL
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 6.87  kWH 6.87  kWH 4.39  kW 1.57  Hrs 5.75  Hrs
March with ESTIMATED reactor volume
Horizontal Arm: Boron/External Air
Section Horz React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 564  kWH 564  kWH 2.30  kW 245  Hrs 2.97  Hrs
April with HORIZONTAL unit
Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Total React Vert Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 3445  kWH 3445  kWH 2.03  kW 1697  Hrs 3.50  Hrs
Sept with MAIN unit -- excluding Control Box
Main Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 4019  kWH 4019  kWH 3.12  kW 1286  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with MAIN unit
Reactor Unit: Boron/External Air
Section Total React Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 2297  kWH 2297  kWH 3.12  kW 735  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct with Reactor WAFER
TESTING : Boron/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material B/Air - - Fake Expt
Energy 4019  kWH 4019  kWH 3.12  kW 1286  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with MAIN unit
TESTING : Boron/External Air
Section Total Wafer Chamber Fake
Energy
Expt
Power
FAKE? (Unfeasible,Concealable)
Material - B/Air - Fake Expt
Energy 61.2  kWH 61.2  kWH 3.12  kW 19.6  Hrs 4.00  Hrs
Oct (Self-sustaining) with Reactor WAFER
FAKE? means that the fake could run longer than the experiment, and is NOT eliminated
REAL means that the fake is ELIMINATED by an experiment, so the device could be REAL

6.7. Experiments -- FAKES by WEIGHT

At present we have no independent measurements of the weight of the various parts of the eCat.

7. Unlimited-Energy Methods

These have the characteristic that they can run for an unlimited time.

Instead of calculating how long they could run, one has to calculate what is is needed to produce the observed power.

7.1. Tarallo Water Diversion Fake

Proposed by : Flavio Tarallo (as reported by Rothwell) : Vortex

However Flavio Tarallo has proposed an idea that is at least plausible, although highly unlikely in my opinion. He believes the flow of water might be diverted inside the machine, such that one tube leads to the thermocouple and RH meter, and another bypasses them. The flow of water is then joined and it empties out of the end. Let me quote his message describing this:

"The temperature and 'air quality' measurements were taken INSIDE the reactor, (in holes prepared by Rossi) instead at its final output. Nobody could see inside the reactor so there are a lot of possibility. One possibility I thought is that an amount of the water flow have been diverted. One part of the water flow actually goes inside the "hot core", heats and became vapour and another part simply bypass everything in another internal pipe and go directly to the output where it is re-mixed with the first part. Nobody measured the output steam flow or its speed (should be around 74 m/s for 5 g/s flow!!!) The electric power input was sufficient to vaporize the fraction of the water flow that goes into the core and that is measured. With a divertor commanded by a simply thermo-sensor, all can you see from outside is a behaviour like a start of internal energy generation insted it's only the start of a flow fractioning. All this consideration is independent from the honesty of Rossi, there is this possibility so it has to be denied by a new measure (possibly without steam production)."

I do not know if the holes were prepared by Rossi. Anyway, this method would call for a complex set of hidden remote controls, to accommodate observations such as the one that the temperature was higher when input power was reduced from 1000 W to 400 W.

A variation by ee-tom on theeestory.com provides another way of making the output tube feel hot :

You might also have an electrically heated water outlet hose, heated on outside, and ask people to touch this as added confirmation that water is really hot.

This is a very serious "unlimited energy" fake. It would possibly not have been detected by the January experiment or the February experiment.

ALL of the measurements in ALL of the experiments were done via the instrument port in the chimney, and would only have measured the temperature and steam dryness in the outer compartment.

The water sent through the "reactor chamber" is simply heated by a resistor, powered from the control box.

The observed "temperature profiles" could easily be accomplished by changing the power sent to the resistor: the connection between the control box and the main unit was NOT measured.

The power loss from the outer HOT section to the inner COLD section is estimated to be about 80W (for a rubber tube 2 cm outer diameter, 1cm inner diameter). This loss would be hidden by diverting more water from the outer to the inner tube, and could be further reduced by the use of insulation.

NEITHER of the following January reports eliminate this fake:

Jacques Dufour also attended the demonstration. He does not speak much Italian, so he could not follow the discussion. He made some observations, including one that I consider important, namely that the outlet pipe was far too hot to touch. That means the temperature of it was over 70°C.


Celani did not see the steam emerge from the end of the pipe, but he reported the whistling sound of steam passing through the pipe. (Dufour did not notice that but he says he is hard of hearing, especially high frequency sounds.) I think there is no question the water boiled, and much of it was vaporized, so there was massive excess heat.

(from Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device)

From the March report :

To the right at the chimney, a black hose of heavy rubber, for high temperatures, carries the hot water/steam to the sink on the wall of the adjacent room. ..... We had free access to the heater electric supply, to the inlet water hose, to the outlet steam valve and water hose and to the hydrogen gas feed pipe.

The following was presumably done through either the instrument port or the steam valve -- both of which connect to the OUTER (hot) section of the Torelli fake.

Between 11:00 and 12:00 o’clock, control measurements were done on how much water that had not evaporated. The system to measure the non-evaporated water was a certified Testo System, Testo 650, with a probe guaranteed to resist up to 550°C.

If this visual check was made at the sink in the "adjacent room" then it WOULD eliminate the Tarallo fake.

The 100 °C temperature is reached at 10:42 and at about 10:45 all the water is completely vaporized found by visual checks of the outlet tube ...

This test at the steam valve would NOT eliminate the Tarallo fake:

... and the valve letting out steam from the chimney.

For the April test the output hose was specifically examined, ruling out aTarallo fake:

During the April 28 test, we also checked the steam flow through the outlet hose regularly. Some steam was reasonably being condensed back into water in the three-meter-long tube that was exposed to air and was thus at a slightly lower temperature, and a small amount of water was observed coming out of the hose.

Future experiments : all measurements must be conducted OUTSIDE of the Rossi Device, not through the "instrument port".

7.2. Hidden Wires or Tubes

It has been suggested that hidden wires could have provided the observed power (Rothwell: Hidden wire hypothesis redux). This can only be eliminated by inspecting the apparatus.

Similarly, a small tube could supply gas to the unit (Rothwell: Vortex List) --- although other methods might detect this (change of weight, imbalance between input and output volumes).

All experiments were fully open to inspection. There were clearly no hidden wires capable of carrying 10kW or any tubes. However, for the April tests the total power was down to 2.6 kW -- well within the specification for a wall outlet. In Europe AC power plugs and sockets single-phase sockets of 16A/250V (4 kW) are available. (Note that ALL the tests have been conducted in facilities uner Rossi's control.)

For the April test Lewan reports:

We also controlled all other equipment and checked that there were no hidden connections from the floor or walls.

To safely exclude the transfer of external wireless energy, we measured electromagnetic fields from 5 Hz to 3 GHz. No increase could be noted except for a slight increase at the power-grid frequency of 50 Hz, close to the electrical resistor positioned around the reactor.

Ian Bryce of the Australian Skeptics Society has published a report in which he proposes that SOME of the tests could have been faked by sending current through the neutral wire.

Bryce found that in all six published tests up to July, a misconnected earth lead could funnel in up to 3 kilowatts, thus bypassing the power meters used, and accounting for all the measured output power in the form of steam. In all later tests, there was no valid power measurement due to poorly placed thermometers.

This representative photo is from Krivit's (New Energy Times) visit:

This analysis is based in part on Krivit's photograph, and comments by Lewan that that he did not check all the wires in his early test. (In Lewan's September 2011 test he measured the power on the pair of wires going into the eCat). Levi does not specifically record whether power was measured on all the wires, and the Watts-Up meter might be confused by this type of miswiring.

For the remaining tests, Bryce relies on the well-reported calorimetric deficiencies.

There is another "power meter" fake (See Gibbs articles?) which involves a more complicated wiring fake.

However, in both the September 7 and October 6 experiments, Lewan reported that

A clamp ampere meter was used to measure the current fed to the whole system as well as the current feeding the electrical resistance. The difference was found to be insignificant at all times.

and that

The electrical connection was made through a residual-current device to make sure that no current was fed through the ground cable.

These eliminate any possibility of the proposed wiring fakes in those experiments.

7.3. Reduced Water Intake

Proposed by : XXX on Randi forum and Dr D R Jones on Alek Lett Blog

Since the flow wasn't monitored continually, the water intake could have been cut off or reduced.

Dr D R Jones : Now if this is simply a hoax then it would have been relatively simple to carry out given the observations above. Instead of an internal heater, substitute a water flow valve (the wires are in the correct place). Let the external 300W heater heat the initial water flow up to 60 Celsius – then get peoples attention by stating that they should watch the computer as the reaction is initializing – then simply close the flow valve so that the water flow is greatly reduced – the insulated device and the 300W external resistor will do the rest. Thus the question to be asked – did either Essen or Kullander monitor the water flow during this transition from flowing water to steam generation?

7.4. Accidental Water Diversion Through the eCat (or Measurement Artifacts)

Proposed by : Peter van Noorden (vortex)

Further it would be interesting to know if water can flow through the "chimney" of the reactor directly into the black tube. To figure out what is going on one have to add a substance (dye) to the water and see if the dye can be seen in the " condensed" water.

If non vaporised water is carried to the end of the black tube this will have consequences for the calculation of excess heat.

Rothwell and Stephen A. Lawrence discuss this problem at vortex

The question of measurement artifacts due to the location of the thermocouple was also revisted recently by Rothwell at vortex :

To be sure, McKubre and others have pointed out that the outlet thermocouple position is not ideal, and it might be picking up some heat from another path. This may be happening to some extent. It might even be measurable. But it can be shown that other paths are minor compared to the flow of water.

 

7.5. Input Electrical Power

Proposed by : YYYY on Randi forums

A high-frequency or phase component on the power input could give a false power reading.

Solution: monitor the input voltage and current with an oscilloscope.

However, since the control wires cannot handle the required 12kW a false reading wouldn't affect the result.

7.6. Combustible "Water"

Proposed by : Jones Beene Vortex

The water supply is not, in fact, water, but a combustible liquid which looks like water.

In the category of clear water-based liquids which burn cleanly enough to be used indoors, and which could be confused with water in a testing arrangement (since it would be so unexpected as the 'trick' used to pull-off the deception) - there are several choices.

These are miscible and with 40-50% water and the resultant blend would be combustible at that dilution level - would go undetected by a group of observers who assumed that it was water. All of these ingredients would be expected to be legitimately found in any company which produces or evaluates alternative fuels - and if the ruse was discovered prematurely . "oops, Igor, you brought in the wrong container," or else "yes, our municipal water is very polluted here".

...

Hydrogen peroxide produces only steam. HOOH is more viscous than water, but appears colorless in solution. It is both an oxidant an a propellant. When used in a blend, it would provide free oxygen and steam, so that air is not needed to combust the other ingredients (or less is needed).

...

7.7. Pump Power and Friction

Suggested by : Jones Beene Vortex

The initial suggestion was that the pump power should be included in the energy budget, as it inputs power into the system:

Jones Beene: The pump's power must be included in P-in.

A liter/sec pump seems to require one horsepower or about .75 kW.

223.00-3 Fluid Mechanics - Course 223 FRICTION IN FLUID FLOW

Robin van Spaandonk: If we assume 100 psi for the mains pressure, then a flow rate of 1 L /s equates to a total power of 724 W, assuming all the power in the water gets used. This would raise the temperature of that water by 0.173 ºC, so it would at most make a 4% difference, even if it were all included.

In the extreme:

Jones Beene: Allow me to apply reductio ad absurdum to this situation.

Let's say Rossi shows up with a reactor that puts out one megawatt of heat. It requires a large flow of water, which is coming from a local dam and goes into a sewer. This new reactor requires no electrical input at all !! The heat is measured by a thermal circuit that removes heat from the stainless steel reactor, and the new owners of this magical device use it to heat the factory. It remains warm all year without any electricity !

Let's say the device is opened up and found to contain nothing but flow constrictors - which convert water pressure into heat via friction - nothing else.

Is Rossi entitled to claim that the megawatt of heat is "overunity" and therefore free energy ?

(To do : caculate the resistive heating for the given flows, both for the nominal pipe thickness, and where the available area is divided into many smaller tubes)

However, this discussion did lead to another proposal for a "real" energy catalyzer: see "Magnetostriction and Cavitation".

8. Alternative Explanations

These would pass all calorimetric tests and inspections. They should therefore be regarded not as fakes, but alternative explanations of the source of energy.

8.1. Nuclear : Plutonium 238

One gram of Plutonium 238 generates approximately 0.5 watts of power.

Material Abrev Power
by
Mass
kW/kg
Power
by
Volume
kW/L
Specific
gravity
Plutonium 238Pu238 0.500 0.000 0.000

To produce 10 kW of power one would need 5.00 kg of Pu 238.

Since 1993, all of the plutonium-238 the U.S. has used in space probes has been purchased from Russia. 16.5 kilograms in total have been purchased.

For the proposed 1 MW unit, one needs 500.00 kg -- more than was acquired by NASA.

Note : the Wiki Energy Density value is very high : it is probably the total energy emitted until the Plutonium is effectively depleted.

8.2. Heat Pump

KitemanSA on the polywell forum. suggested that a heat pump could have provided the observed power.

If these numbers are true, then even with a perfect heat pump, the output power (given max Coefficient of Performance and 80W input) could only be ~4.6kW.

CoP ~ T/ΔT ~300/5 = 60
60*80 = 4800 = 4.6kW

So unless there is significant measurement error or fraud, this isn't a heat pump device either.


Actually...

if the room was at typical room temperature, which is ~21 ºC, the theoretical CoP would be infinite, so it COULD be a fancy heat pump.

The Wiki article indicates that the maximum CoP in a Carnot Cycle might be as low as 12.5

The January experiment would have needed a CoP of 31, and the February experiment would need 200.

With the new "mini" eCats (March, April experiments) the CoP is significantly lower:

March 29th
P(out)= 4.69Kw (Thermal)
P(in) = 0.33Kw (Electrical)
COP = 15

April 19
P(out)= 2.95Kw (Thermal)
P(in) = 0.35Kw (Electrical)
COP = 8.5

April 28
P(out)= 2.70Kw (Thermal)
P(in) = 0.37Kw (Electrical)
COP = 7.3

The last two are below the theoretical limits of a Carnot cycle, so they cannot be excluded on theoretical grounds.

A theoretical, infinite-CoP heat pump could probably only be ruled out by enclosing the entire Main Unit in a calorimeter. If this were filled with Nitrogen, it would also rule out any method using Air as a fuel.

Again, we come to the distinction between "not noticed" and "not checked" (none of the reports mention the surface temperature of the eCat).A 12kW heat pump would surely result in a "cold" feel to the surface of the the eCat, if not the room. A 2.4kW heat pump : not so obvious.

8.3. Magnetostriction and Cavitation

Suggested by : Jones Beene Vortex

...

The Hydro-Dynamics pump employed cavitation and shock waves from a dimpled rotor spinning inside a housing to increase the temperature of water flowing through the device. It was tested on a number of occasions to be OU, but not reliably. Jed Rothwell has reported on it, as did Infinite Energy. Now - imagine the rotor being non-rotating !
 
Cavitation in the Rossi device could be described as Griggs pump - with the reactor substituted for the dimpled rotor. The reactor cavitates violently, but at low excursion, and would not be noticed in a demo, since the effects are dampened by the water flow. Primarily, it produces cavitation INSIDE the cell, and ironically this would never have been noticed outside the cell except for contrasting the two tests in Bologna, one with low water flow, and one with high. This  could be a most fortuitous discovery for anyone working on a replication.

...

The reactor containing the nanopowder would function like a humming transformer core and it could also operate internally with shock waves pushing hydrogen into Casimir cavities. As in the Griggs pump, cavitation generates shock waves which convert mechanical energy into acceleration and eventually into heat energy - in a way that is gainful at times. The Rossi reactor is apparently gainful all of the time, and that could be due to the employment of nano geometry. Many of the common transducers used for sonochemistry are magnetostrictive instead of piezoelectric, as these are more robust at high input. The efficiency is very high.
 
It is too much of a coincidence that the reactor loses it heating effect at a temperature which coincides with the Curie point of nickel, and is more robust when more heat is removed by higher  water flow; not to mention that the "resistors" have a magnetic field. An interesting point is that the inventor may have discovered this inadvertently and never thought to optimize the input power, which should be easier to do via an inductive coil instead of resistance heaters.

...

9. Rothwell's Razor

This is a variation of (the usually misquoted) Occam's razor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

... the razor is a principle that suggests we should tend towards simpler theories ... until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power. Contrary to the popular summary, the simplest available theory is sometimes a less accurate explanation.

It is very tempting to propose elaborate schemes by which a fake eCat could be detected. For instance, in the author's physorg.com posts he suggested feeding it a brew of various isotopes of water to make sure that the SAME water goes in and comes out.

However, in the Vortex mailing list Re: [Vo]:Hidden wire hypothesis redux

Jed Rothwell suggests in response to another comment:

This is my point, there may be a million things you haven't thought of.

Nope. That does not work. A good experiment cannot have a million possible problems. If we had to think up a million ways that an experiment might be wrong (or fake -- pretty much the same thing) then no experiment would ever prove anything, and there would be no progress.

A bad experiment can have a large number of possible errors (or ways to make it fake).

....

Flow calorimetry experiments similar to this, with boiling water or flowing water, have been done many times. The potential errors are well understood and their number is strictly limited -- unless you are aiming for the kind of precision SRI achieved.

In an experiment with only 4 main parameters -- input power, inlet temperature, outlet temperature and flow rate -- the number of potential significant errors will [be] small, and so will the number of ways deliberately fake data can be surreptitiously introduced. When the method is complicated, and the results close to the margin, with many parameters with, for example, the possibility of recombination producing a significant error, then there are many ways an error can creep in, and many ways to deliberately introduce fake data.

Complexity and a low s/n ratio invite error, misinterpretation or fraud.

10. Conclusion

Since the December/January experiments only recorded the inputs and outputs for a short time (30 minutes), almost ANY of the fakes could have produced the result.

For the February experiment Levi was allowed to inspect everything, EXCLUDING only the 1-liter reactor chamber. If you accept all of Levi's February report, then all chemical fakes are conclusively ruled out. Neither the January or February reports rule out a Tarallo Water Diversion Fake.

The March report DOES rule out a Tarallo fake -- but since the Horizontal arm was NOT unwrapped, it does NOT rule out all chemical fakes.

The April experimental setup was adequate (although the dryness of the steam was not measured) and DOES rule out a Tarallo fake. Since the eCat was NOT unwrapped the 2.9 hour run was NOT long enough to rule out ANY of the chemical fakes. (Only some of the stored-heat fakes are eliminated). The April test does not even rule out a simple Water Storage fake.

Since the January-February and March-April tests use different versions of the eCAT it is not obvious that their results can be directly combined. Experiments producing steam are more susceptable to measurement errors, and the output water volume has not been reliably recorded.

At present EVERY known fake has been eliminated by at least ONE of the experiments, but the Rossi eCat has NOT been proven to be real by any ONE experiment. Some will argue that this means it's real, while others will argue that it could still be fake.

  Mode Batteries and Chemicals Tarallo Water Diversion Water Storage
JanSteam FAKE? FAKE? FAKE?
FebWater REAL FAKE? REAL
MarSteam FAKE? REAL REAL
AprSteam FAKE? REAL FAKE?

("Fake?" means that all Fakes are NOT excluded. "Real" means that ALL fakes are excluded.)

An eCat using one of the "Alternative Explanations" would be as important an engineering breakthrough as an LENR device As Sherlock Holmes said in Silver Blaze:

... and improbable as it is, all other explanations are more improbable still.

Therefore, at present, we cannot conclusively rule out ALL possible fakes from any one experiment, and the variations in experiments do not allow them to be directly combined, so it is not yet PROVED that the Rossi device is real.

It must, however be noted that Rossi made the "Calorimetric Black Box" eCAT available without any restrictions (other than the use of radioactive spectral detectors), so the lack of proof is due to defects in the observers instruments or techniques.

11. Discussion

This paper considers UPPER BOUNDS for what a Fake could achieve.

Any actual fake would run into engineering difficulties long before those limits were reached.

When designing a machine for propulsion or for electricity, thermodynamics is your enemy. The heat of friction, for instance, robs your output. But if your machine is simply heating water, then thermodynamics is your friend, or at least neutral.

But the limits of thermal efficiency are not THAT far off 100% : for instance, modern gas furnaces have an efficiency of over 95% (Furnaces and Boilers). Nor is the assumption that 100% of the weight or volume is fuel : advanced rockets such as the Proton UR-500 have a 95.6% fuel-to-dry-weight factor.

So any discussion of "implementation" is quibbling over less than 5%!

Because of the difficulty of measuring the results with steam (volume and content), future experiments should be used to heat the water (as in the February experiment). For this we need:

  • Input electrical power (BETWEEN the control panel and the reactor)
    This must also be observed with an oscilloscope to ensure there is no high frequency/phase component which could confuse a simple power meter.
  • Monitor ALL the power wires at all times to eliminate the Bryce and similar fakes.
  • Input hydrogen (by weight)
  • Inlet temperature
  • Outlet temperature OUTSIDE of the eCAT
  • Water volume IN
  • Water or Steam volume OUT
  • Volume of ALL components.
  • Total weight before
  • Total weight after
  • Detection of a Heat pump requires an air calorimeter round the main unit
    (Particularly since the April tests with the mini eCat were within the Carnot limit.)
  • Sealed unit, to prevent drawing air as a fuel (High-temperature 'cling-wrap', or a calorimeter filled with Nitrogen)
    OR
    Thorough inspection to check for leaks

As much as possible of the unit should be open to inspection to reduce the volumes (or weights) in which fake material could be hidden, and thus shorten the time needed to eliminate fakes.

The methodology I have been recommending is substantially the same as that described by Grabowski et al : Robust Performance Validation of LENR Energy Generators

In particular, they draw attention to the problems associated with using steam, rather than water:

grabowski steam

The issue of steam quality is analyzed in a separate document:

eCat Steam Quality v 410H (with index)
eCat Steam Quality v 410H (without index)

12. Details

Some of the details have been moved to a separate document: Details

13. Physorg Posts

These ideas were first noted in PhysOrg (posting as alanf777)

The 1,000-character posting limit made my comments rather hard to read), so I have extracted and clarified them in Physorg v1

14. Acknowledgements

Thanks to Jed Rothwell and others too numerous to name on the "Vortex" mailing list for information, corrections and comments.

Oh, and thanks to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who really, really liked the phrase which Sherlock Holmes used more times than this paper has space for (in The Sign of the Four):

Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth.”