QuarkX News Watch Thread (Update: Rossi to Write Report Monday, Publish Tuesday)

Andrea Rossi has repeated today that on Monday, June 13, 2016 he will be providing news about the testing of the E-Cat QuarkX reactors he has been testing. Rossi has reported that today (Sunday) is the last day of the testing he has been conducting with a potential customer/partner.

When asked about details concerning the QuarkX reactor, Rossi has repeatedly said that they would be provided when the preliminary testing was completed. I asked Rossi today on the Journal of Nuclear Physics whether the conclusion of this period of testing signaled the ending of the preliminary R&D testong for the QuarkX reactor and he responded “Yes.”

So tomorrow might be a significant day in the E-Cat story. I don’t know what kind of details we can expect to be provided, but I’ll certainly be paying attention. Rossi also said today: “Will be Interesting.”

UPDATE: (Jun 12, 2016)

Andrea Rossi just posted this on the JONP:

Andrea Rossi
June 12, 2016 at 6:10 PM
Robert Dorr:
I will. The test is finished right now.
Tomorrow we will make a short report. The day after tomorrow it will be published.
Thank you for your kind words.
Warm Regards,

  • cashmemorz

    Where is the report?

  • psi2u2

    Thank you for the wonderfully clear analysis.

  • DrD

    Here is the report.
    June 14, 2016 on ECAT News

    Report Disclaimer:



    Cylinder made with proper material:

    length 30 mm
    diam 1 mm
    Energy produced: 100 Wh/h
    Energy consumed: 0.5 Wh/h
    Light produced (percentage of the energy produced): 0-50%
    Electric energy produced: 0-10%
    Heat produced: 0- 100%

    Light, energy and heat can be modulated to modulate the percentages within the limits above listed, provided the combined percentages must total 100%.

    Extremely interesting is the blue light, the analysis of which has resolved theoretical problems related to the roots of the effect.

    Temperature on the surface of the QuarkX: more than 1,500*C
    Note: 2 other QuarkX put in analogous situation gave the same results.

    Further disclaimer:


    End of the report.

    Description of the photo:

    Photo of the heat exchanger pipe that contains the QuarkX: the light spot is through a light eye holed in the pipe. The blue halo from the hole has been analyzed and has made possible to understand the theoretical roots of the effect: the QuarkX is inside the pipe .

    NOTE: THE PHOTO HAS BEEN MANIPULATED TO FORBID HIGH DEFINITION. The colors have been partially obscured. The light is much more intense.

    • DrD

      Rather dissapointing that only 10% can be electric when he previously stated it can be 100%.
      Not surpising in that case that he has concerns about safety when attempting to self drive and control from it’s own electric generation.
      COP = 200
      1 mm diameter ?????? WOW!

      • artefact

        That 10% is still a cop of 20

      • Engineer48

        Hi DrD,

        Direct electricity COP = 20!!!!!!!

        Frack man what more do you want????

        • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

          I guess that DrD is only stating that it is a pity not being able to convert more than a 10%, not that it is not amazing . But of course, it could be improved in the future.

        • DrD

          I agree, it’s excellent! My surprise was just that it’s not what he previously said. EXCELLENT all the same!

        • tlp

          COP is infinite as soon as you get more electricity out than input.

          • Julio Ruben Vazquez Turnes

            Yup. Just create a grid where you have connected each Quark-X to at least another 3 Quarks. If one doesnt deliver enough energy you always have another two as backup. Then you wont need energy input, they all would feed themselves and you get all the unused energy for any other use you want.

            • tlp

              Yes, and you can just discard the heat, if all you need is electricity, at least in small installations.

            • DrD

              Yep but what ever will we do with all that waste heat (in summer) and light. I know, Steam turbines, so more electric. Maybe some photovoltaics aswell.

              • tlp

                Similar situation as with BrLPs SunCell, their next demo is 28th June, in two weeks.
                They don’t yet have direct electricity harvesting but are using photovoltaics. Anyway about 60% is heat, mainly waste heat, but of course can be used if needed.

        • DrD

          Hi Eng,
          Sorry I gave the wrong impession.
          So what could we do with that excess heat in summer?
          Rankine engine? Steam turbine? to increase the % electric?

          • Thomas Kaminski

            A number of thermal coolers exist, but are less efficient than electrical-based refrigeration. With inexpensive, “waste” heat, you can cool as well.

            • tlp

              No refrigeration needed, just cooling like in a car engine.

      • Earlier, Rossi only has confirmed: “a quark that produces electricity only (no heat), with an efficiency of COP >1”

    • 100 Watts from something smaller than a matchstick, and a thermal COP of 200. OK the electricity output is smaller than previously stated, but otherwise – amazing!

      I wonder what the problem they encountered was? Perhaps it just melted!

      • Roland

        Unless my math is seriously defective there’s an implied power density of 16,978W/cc.

        I’ve run it a couple of times now; as the results are shockingly high perhaps a couple of the math minded posters here could run the numbers as well.

        • Roland

          See one issue already…


          • psi2u2

            Please explain. You mean the materials cannot withstand that density?

            • Engineer48


              At electricity COP = 20:
              Power density 424kWe/ltr
              Energy density 3.71GWhe/ltr/year assuming 1 year fuel life.

    • Rene

      Looks interesting. Electrical COP is 20, pretty good assuming it does that reliably. I just wish his photo did not look like a blurry Columbo intro. Clearly he wants to hide the details, so it is still a waiting game.

    • Thomas Kaminski

      SO let me set the controls: 50% light out, 10% electricity, 40% heat… Hey Fresh vegetables year round in the frozen north! Hmmm.. Maybe the blue light isn’t good for photosynthesis…

      • tlp

        blue and red are optimal colors. Just add some red leds.
        But in many applications you can discard light and heat and just use the electricity.

        • Thomas Kaminski

          That’s good news. I know a local company had a NASA contract for space-based growth chambers and they used red LEDs. Now we can site the food production to areas with good, sustainable water resources like the Great Lakes regions, rather than regions with good climate but poor water resources (like California!).

          • tlp

            Red LEDs are easier to make than blue. Red is OK but blue+red is perfect.

      • Fedir Mykhaylov

        Blue light is the basis of photosynthesis.

    • Ged

      Dang, >1500C at surface? I see now why they needed so much material RnD at the start of all this last year.

  • First we had the low temp ecat, then we had the hot cat, now we have the quark X.

    Every time one version of the ecat reached reliability, Rossi comes up with a new one much better version and neglected the older versions completely.

    Working this way we will never see an ecat on market.

    Where would apple be without releasing one iPhone because better hardware came available in the last months before release?

    Rossi should develop one version, bring it to reliable performance and give it to another team doing the production engineering. In the meanwhile Rossi can work on the next version.

    But this way it will not work…

    • Ged

      The 1MW plants are for sale, as Engineer48’s people are standing by post-litigation. You have gotten the wrong impression. The QuarkX is a new product, but it hasn’t stopped production work of the current product as far as we know.

  • georgehants

    I don’t think anybody has ever thought of this, but would a completely open, public, repeatable demonstration of Mr. Rossi’s most basic e-cat measured by as many independent scientists as wish to do so, showing a COP above 1 help to establish Cold Fusion as a new science.
    I am sure to get the usual reply’s giving a multitude of good reasons why this would not be a good idea, most of them based on Astrology.
    Mr. Rossi seems to enjoy holding on to his exalted mystery position just like the Wizard of OZ, we, I think, are beyond even capitalistic rationality and only psychology (another failed science) could hold any answers.

  • akupaku

    You are quite right I think, nothing can be excluded. Scam is not excluded but IMHO is not likely in light of everything we know. Certainly Rossi has made many apparently false promises and announcements in the past but the explanation does not need to be fraud but could be unfounded enthusiasm and optimism or could even be deliberate exaggerations for one purpose or another, either to throw off competition or lure investors to fund an invention that he does not yet have full control and understanding over but sees as promising.

    Seems to me that during the years Rossi has been continuously improving and gaining better control of the e-cat making yesterday’s perspectives and promises obsolete. Hopefully the inventive cycle takes a pause soon to send something useful into mass production.

    I don’t think there is any definite proof that Rossi is completely black (fraudulent) but neither is there yet evidence that he is completely white (honest), probably he is some shade of grey (like most people, a normal person!) but not excluding the extremes as a deceitful crook or an ingenious honest inventor. Time will show but so far I am leaning towards the white end of the spectrum.

  • Engineer48

    Interesting life cost of 12.13 Euro / MWh, which includes all cost over 20 years, including the plant cost amortisation.

    That is 0.012 Euro /kWht, then assuming 33% electrical generation efficiency comes out at 0.036 Euro / kWhe.

  • Engineer48

    Hi Robert,

    I really doubt the water is boiling at such a fierce rate.

    Assuming each reactor is 15m long & 3m wide that is 45m^2 of water surface area per reactor x 4 reactors = 180m^2 of boiling surface area.

    Doesn’t need to boil a lot to generate the 25kg/minute of required steam. At 180m^2 surface area that is 140g/m^2/minute of steam generation.

  • LuFong

    Andrea Rossi
    June 13, 2016 at 8:19 PM

    Frank Randall:
    No; we made some stop for different reasons. The QuarkX cannot be considered ready to be a product, much work remains to be done.
    Warm Regards,

    Andrea Rossi
    June 13, 2016 at 10:03 PM

    No. The results are the output of measurements made by me, but reality cannot depend on a subjective act. I honestly made my measurements together with my team and our Pertner, we celebrated, but we know pretty well that there are still shortcomings. The sole real validation will be made by the Customers when and if the QuarkX will hit massively the market. Now we must operate along two directions:
    1- consolidate the reliability of the results and the product
    2- organize a massive production
    Warm Regards,


    • Rene

      “…but we know pretty well that there are still shortcomings…”
      I interpret Rossi’s point 1 as he still has problems with the reaction control system. It’s still flakey. Happy he is being candid and not Pollyanna about it. But, this means he has much more work ahead.

      • Roland

        What is it about an average COP of >50 over the course of a year long test of a multi-reactor setup, and protracted periods in SSM, that leads you, over and over, to this conclusion?

        Evidence please…

        • Rene

          Lol, Roland, such a funny guy. Show me definitive evidence of what you just wrote then my heart will soar like the hawk.

          • Roland

            It’ll be presented in court shortly and I, for one, fully expect that that evidence will be completely consistent with the claims stated in the document presented to the court. To do anything other than fully bolster those claims with the available witnesses and data is, frankly, unimaginable as the original contract never required that the 1 megW plant to demonstrate a year long average COP greater than 6.

            Nothing could be stupider than making a statement that exceeds the requirements of the original contract, and hinge the case on these fresh performance claims, only to have it refuted by the data and witnesses when the trial opens.

            If the logic of this is incomprehensible to you there is no hope of reason prevailing in settling our debate any time soon; as is probably the case.

            Ultimately time will resolve this, and similar issues, meanwhile I’m still waiting for something more from you than deflection to bolster your views.


            • Rene

              I am very happy you have found solace in true believerness. “Nothing could be more stupider” (your words) than accepting a reality that has little basis on evidence. For myself I remain convinced there is a LENR effect by the many replications to date. I can see that there is the possibility of LENR+ (a strong effect), but that so far, evidence of that has been suppressed. Moreover, it appears that it is not reliable, or, that it requires careful manual control to make it work. Sadly, that secrecy path he has chosen (clearly fully his choice to make) has consequences – only a fully realized device available for anyone to use is what awaits us given that choice. Am waiting on that one, but I, and you should too, am quite interested in the work of others in this interesting field.
              Your logic is circular, the mark of a true believer. Be happy in your bliss.

              • Roland

                I don’t have evidence that the claims that are to be presented in court are true; I’ve deduced that any other interpretation, other than that the claims to be presented in a court of law will be fully substantiated, is completely illogical because unless the witnesses and data fully support the claims presented to the court this will completely undermine the court case and Leonardo will lose.

                Once again; there was no requirement to demonstrate a COP>50 to the court to uphold Leonardo’s position regarding the original contract.

                I do, admittedly, begin with the assumption that neither Rossi or his lawyer are stupid.

                Why does this seem irrational to you?

    • Roland

      At the end of a year long test, of a design that prototyped at least 2 years before the test began, Rossi estimated that at least a further 6 months would be required to integrate and engineer the insights gained, throughout this test period, into a production version of the next generation 1megW low temp steam plant that embodies the basic reliability expected by customers for steam plants; the exotic nature of the underlying technology not withstanding.

      Are we to be shocked that 6 months after the conceptualization of Quark there are still things to be worked out prior to going into production? Well if the new partner has specific product goals in mind for the Quark it’s not the least bit surprising that there’s still work to be done.

      Had the current test been an epic failure, that alienated a potential business partner, a protracted groan would be appropriate; this does not appear to be the case.

    • I read “much work remains to be done” as deliberate downplaying of expectations. It could reflect unexpected engineering problems, which would not be unexpected, or it could be a stratagem of some kind.

      I’m neither surprised nor worried by this development, but what does cause me concern is the apparent cessation of any development (or even mention) of the 1MW reactor type. This design (we are led to understand) works, and simply requires some months of further engineering development in order to become a viable, world changing product. Yet to all intents and purposes it has simply been dropped, at least by Rossi, and there is no indication that the baton has been picked up by anyone else.

      On the face of it such a situation would be crazy, like throwing away a suitcase full of diamonds, so either all concerned are very loosely wrapped – or the story we have been fed is bs and there are many more factors in play than we are aware of.

      • Jarea

        Yes, and we know what all that means… :(. Fraud and scam are words that i am hearing
        A product is the only thing that can save Rossi and his promise of a massive production of the 1MW product dissolves each month.

        • If you are hearing ‘fraud and scam’ a lot then you are currently on the wrong blog – you want ECN I think. Bye.

          • Jarea

            Sorry but i will comment and i will visit the blogs that i want. Please, let people show facts and personal opinions even if you don´t like.

            • Ged

              It can get obnoxious when people jump on new stuff and forget everything they already know just to push an agenda or narrative they want. I don’t think you do it purposefully, but taking a step back before the QuarkX consumes you may be helpful.

              • Jarea

                That is exactly what i wanted to say! +1

        • Rene

          There is an intermediate position between scam/fraud and working device: unreliable. I do not think Rossi is fraudulent especially when other replications, minor though they are, suggest LENR is happening. Rossi has said in the past that achieving high COP is hard. The reaction goes nonlinear and the controls have to act quickly lest it fizzle (fall out of SSM) or burst (runaway to melting). I suspect that he has not mastered a reliable automatic reaction control system. I thought for a while he mastered it with his quark, but his recent comments on it suggest otherwise.

          • Jarea

            I think reliability is not a problem when there was a full 1 year test which was successfull and with COP 50.
            Product and sales/execution must be first before defining a whole new product with new technology.
            The fraud is not on the device it is on the expectancy that he has communicated.
            It is not aligned with the reality.

            • Ged

              Rossi is marketing the “COP 50” 1MW plant, that didn’t stop being a thing. Don’t get so caught up in this QuarkX development.

              • Rene

                Careful. By his own statement “guaranteed COP 6”. COP 50 is bonus territory.

            • Rene

              So stated it was successful (no report to back that one), but with Rossi there 24/7, the 1MW plant never unattended by him. This is where it seems a lot of manual adjustments were made to keep it running in the sweet spot. And yes, his pronouncements have been highly optimistic, always nearly ready, though never quite done. I attribute this to years long research on his part, changes in design, refinements in the control systems. He has been candid about the risk factors (F8/F9 warnings) in his outward facing comments. I have no idea and I doubt anyone else has been privy to what he says to ‘customers’, ‘partners’, and investors but I assume any decent speculative investor or VC will do due diligence. That’s their job and duty.

    • pg

      Hopefully Mats Lewan will have some more information about what is happening, as I do not think much will come out of this for the time being.

    • “The results are the output of measurements made by me[…]

      Simply said: the report will be absolutely worthless regarding trustworthiness.

      • “I honestly made my measurements together with my team and our Pe(a)rtner

        Highly selective comment – as always.

        • Yes I guess it will be completely worthless. Just like any other comments on the JoNP.

          • psi2u2

            Comments by who?

      • Manuel Cruz

        You are taking the wrong reading. The QuarkX is in alpha stage. They are taking measurements and writing reports for themselves. It is a proof of concept to check whether it works and what changes to make, not a validation of a finished product.

    • Rene

      His over-optimism on product availability aside, the history seems to be:
      – Rossi discovers a strong LENR effect
      – He melts down many devices
      – He asks for help. People like Forcardi assist and provide more insight
      – He makes a somewhat stable Elbow e-cat (L shaped).
      The previous is years long
      – Then he refines that work by forming cuboid e-cats
      – He discovers how to eliminate the medium/high gamma side reactions
      – He works on increasing energy density and increasing reliability.
      – He needs money
      – Asks for people to sign up to buy (nonbinding offer) domestic e-cats.
      – That gives him a huge list of interested parties, used to develop funding sources
      – partnerships form, partnerships dissolve
      More years (4-5) ensue.
      – At some point he finds some larger investors
      – First 1MW plant (sent to unknown military customer)
      – Second 1MW plant & demo
      A couple of years ensue
      – 1+ year test with IH
      – Much more work on refinement of 1MW (his container domicile year)
      – New research trying to understand the theoretical principles
      – New e-catx quark – different tech?
      A year + litigation in flux
      – Focused on wire LENR (e-catx)
      – Better understanding, maybe solid basis on the LENR principles
      Less than a year ensues
      I suspect this next iteration will be much quicker. Maybe even leads to a viable beta product. All of the above is a mixture of what has been said and my guesses.

      • LuFong

        Two other things I predict. 1) Take out multiple patents along the way. 2) When someone actually produces a working LENR device, refer to previous patent that is tangentally related and sue.

        Just my cynical guess….

  • Pweet

    We don’t know yet. So far, all we know is, someone keeps flogging it.

  • Mats002

    Scam is not plausible because of the sum of the number of professionals that have seen the E-Cat IRL for days and months, still endorsing it even against their former customers/employers.

    Add to that the technical coherence of ‘Rossi says’ which has been reviewed by hundreds of professionals in this and other forums over years.

    Add to that 3rd parts NiH experiments showing XH and radiation anomalies, even long before AR appeared on stage.

    Add to that psychology. AR as an individual might be in spin, but how to explain that none of the professionals of all kind (engineers, investors, …) over 5+ years in contact with him have witnessed so.

    Add to that…

    Occams raisor.

    • Bruce__H

      Academics, engineers, professionals are practiced at detecting the problems in experiments and theories. They know how to untangle the obstacles that physical systems throw at you and how to straighten out or reinterpret mistaken observations and ideas. However if this is a true scam then we are not dealing with any of this. We are dealing with the sort of instructive stage play that scammers create to take advantage of peoples’s natural assumptions. I would argue that scientists and engineers are exactly the wrong people for detecting the work of a scammer if only because they (the scientists and so on) are used to a world with a certain integrity enforced by nature. A scam makes use of this credulity.

      So I would argue that the correct type of person to detect a scam here is not a professional nuclear engineer or fellow scientist but another scammer. Someone who knows how intentional misdirection works.

      I think that a scam is still plausible in the Rossi adventure.

  • Chapman


    Did anyone determine for sure whether the 6-12 deadline for an IH response is still active, or was it extended to the 20th due to the MTD?

  • Engineer48

    While we wait, here is a nice image of the gauge glass on one of the side wall mounted backup reactors inside the container. Next to the gauge glass is the control box that controls the excitation of the reactor’s heater. Note the thick wires.

    Also note the water level, which aligns with how I think these reactors both boil water and generate dry/superheated steam.

    The amount of air space in the reactor above the boiling water level is very clear in this image.

    • Paul Smith

      In the picture and in the drawing we can see the Pressure Safety Valve “V”.
      Do we know the value of pressure for opening (set pressure)?

      • Engineer48

        Hi Paul,

        Have never seen it stated.

    • cashmemorz

      Re the “nice image of the gauge glass”. By “here” I take it it is to be seen somewhere in your comment. I don’t have it anywhere to be seen. Any help?

      • artefact

        reload the page

        • cashmemorz

          reloaded and see it now. Thanks.

    • Engineer48

      Guess what?

      The 1MWt prime reactor also has Gauge Glasses and right by the computerised volume controlled water pumps. Would then be easy to adjust the constant flow pumps to get the right water level in the reactors.

      BTW those pumps would deliver a very boring, day in – day out, constant flow of water into the reactors.

      • Steve H

        I believe they are PID tuned, mass flow controllers – so no worries, as long as they behave themselves. Probably fed from a common manifold, kept at constant pressure using a pressure control valve and dual redundancy water pumps.
        Or maybe you were being very British and ironic!

        • Engineer48

          Hi Steve,

          Pump spec is attached.

          Pump sucks from below, discharge straight out, degas output straight up.

          If you look at the end image you can see the feed is from the lower white insulated pipes & the degas discharge is straight up into what I suggest is a feed back to the condenser to remove the air bubbles.

          • Steve H

            Thanks Eng48
            I couldn’t find the actual instruments and the closest match appeared to be mass flow controllers.

            • Engineer48

              Hi Steve,


              The pump I listed is the one Rossi used. 24 of them in fact. 6 on each of the 250kWt flat bed reactors.

    • Pweet

      -> Eng48;
      The problem with the design you have shown above is the same as the problem in the original ecat reactor used in the early rests of 2011, and that is, when the water reactor has reached a temperature above boiling point, there is so much bubbling of steam at the reactor/water interface that large amounts of water would erupt very much higher than the tops of the heat exchange fins, and more critically, as high as the steam exit pipes. Thus the outlet pipe would certainly contain wet steam, that is, some steam at 100deg C and some water at 100deg C, or fractionally below.
      If you have a glass bodied electric kettle, and I have, you can demostrate this very easily by putting 25 mm of water in teh kettle and bringing it to the boil, then hold the switch down with your finger to disable the auto off and keep the water boiling.
      You will see the water erupts pretty much to the very top of the kettle. And that’s with a power of 2 kilowatts.
      To guarantee the steam is all superheated and above 100 deg C the design would have to have a separate chamber whereby the section where the steam is superheated is totally separated from the area where the water is initially boiled, to the extent that only steam can exit that section and no water at all.
      The design as shown above does not do that. Thus any volume measurements of the condensate further down the system will consequently be false on the high side. That has always been the criticism of the early reactor design and the test results did not account for it. That was a source of major error to the extent that I believe it accounted for all the supposed excess heat.
      Also, by logical consequence, the volume of supposed steam. and thus excess energy, can be increased to whatever level is required by simply raising the water level in the reactor body, which would result in more and more un-boiled water droplets (or wet steam) being ejected directly out of the steam exit pipe. That is why there could be a guaranteed COP of 6 because the water flow could be increased until it appeared that to be the case.
      In that respect, the design shown above is seriously flawed.

      • Observer

        The problem with your tea kettle comparison is that the heat source of the tea kettle only heats the water and not the steam. aerosoled water droplets entering near atmospheric pressure 103C gas will immediately evaporate. If the steam exiting the chamber at near atmospheric pressure is 103C, then no water droplets can be present. If you want to test this, tilt your electric tea kettle so that half of the heated bottom is exposed only to the steam.

        • Engineer48

          Hi Observer,


          To produce superheated / dry steam, the superheater needs to directly heat the wet steam, which occurs via the heat radiating fins in the upper steam space.

          As far as I know, it is not possible to produce superheated steam by just boiling the water.

          • Superheated steam could be produced if pressure downstream of the NRV at the exit is somewhat lower than within the boiler. Water droplets exiting the valve would then contain enough excess thermal energy to change to the gas phase without additional heat input, as soon as they encounter the reduced pressure.

            That said though, I’m not convinced that ‘fins’ on the topside would be able to conduct enough heat away from the directly immersed main body of the reactor to provide sufficient superheating, and I agree with Pweet that excessive ‘splash’ from furious boiling might be an issue with the ‘flat’ design shown.

            I would expect a more vertically oriented design in which the reactor main body is positioned more or less at the water level so that it is only partially cooled by water, allowing whatever heat exchange surface is employed to become much hotter than the output steam.

            • This is something I suggested back in 2014. The reactor assembly might consist of an insulated solid thermal mass such as a block of cast iron or stainless steel, with multiple cores housed in horizontal bores through the block, closer to the top than the bottom of the mass.

              Separate coolant bores would run vertically through the block, and water level would be maintained at a point slightly below the reactor level.

              This would result in a temperature gradient in the thermal mass, allowing water to pre-heat in the lower part of the bores, boil a little further up, then superheat in the upper parts of the bores next to the reactor cores. The relatively small diameter of the bores and the thermal gradient would act to control boiling ‘splash’, and the design would allow the cores to operate at their optimum temperature of several hundred degrees, as they wouldn’t be directly cooled as in the ‘finned’ design.

            • Rene

              Look at the water level – at the 50% mark. Now look at the entry point of the control wires – at the 25% mark more or less. That could place the upper fins just above the water line to let them be hot enough to superheat the saturated steam. Also, small adjustments of the water level could be one part (the slow part) of the reaction controls. Raising the water level significantly might assist in quenching runaway situations (my guess).

        • Pweet

          The problem is, the whole volume of the kettle is filled with an exceedingly turbulent mass of bubbling water, even though it was only filled to 25mm of water in the bottom.The bubbling is so extensive I can’t see any way that it would not be blown out the exit pipes by the very large volume of steam generated, be it wet or dry.
          I don’t dare tip my kettle on it’s side because it would quite probably crack the glass, even though it’s pyrex, so that point will have to remain unproven.
          However, one point which has been proven is, a watched kettle boils just as fast as an un-watched kettle. But then I think we all knew that.

      • Albert D. Kallal

        Actually, having some water in the boiler is a requirement for correct operation of the boiler. We not talking about super-critical steam, but super-heated. In fact as LONG as there is water then you have super-saturated steam.

        So for correct operation even a “tiny” bit of water on the bottom will ensure good contact with the heat source and AS LONG as there is SOME water, then the heat is STILL being used to CONVERT the water into a gas (and NOT attempting to heat the gas which don’t absorb much of if any energy).

        So the diagram in question is 100% correct since the top part shows heating fins exposed to the water vapor (steam area). This additional heat would produce super-heated steam (a trap will remove the water droplets if any in the vapor).

        The superheated steam thus really only needs a “bit” more of additional heat to become that dry steam.

        So given that the steam area and diagram shows heating fins exposed in the steam area at the top – then yes, that would constitute super-heated steam. This is especially the case if the “level” is set to keep the water level shown in that diagram.

        Albert D. Kallal
        Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • Engineer48

          Hi Albert,

          Found the pumps Rossi used on the 1MW plant.

          They have an inbuilt facility to degas the output, which if you look closely at the pump end of the reactor you can see has been implemented.

          Nice work, which would never have been done if this was a scam.

          The more I look at the photos, the more I understand the engineering design & effort that when into building the reactor and the more my engineer’s gut tells me this is a real COP> 50 reactor.

          • Albert D. Kallal

            Yes, a stream trap is common and little surprise. They are common in steam heating systems.
            Still, a rather NICE find on your part!

            While this is “interesting”, I think this shows that this is just not a big box with some tubes, but something with REAL WORLD engineering that solves the obvious issues and problems of a setup.

            So having the correct designs, pumps and setup that mimics what Rossi stated about how the plant works does bode well for Rossi. And how such a setup would work also is reflected in this design and pictures.

            In fact, as I pointed out above – pictures give away HUGE amounts of little details that allow one to build up parts of a puzzle. I see the design of this plant MUCH more clearly in my mind as a result of your diagram.

            I thus now see why Rossi is hesitant to release pictures of the Quark-X – it is amazing what one can deduce from just a single picture.

            Albert D. Kallal
            Edmonton, Alberta Canada

        • Rene

          Something like this is what I recall of steam superheaters: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_m6EDc76cQjs/TPCO_Alo4yI/AAAAAAAAAD8/FUZoEpKCGS0/s1600/Water_tube_boiler_schematic.jpg
          There is usually a second separate super heating section done to minimize droplets getting through. Is there enough separation, or, is there enough time in the e-cat’s steam section to vaporize any water droplets before they can exit the chamber?

          • Engineer48

            Hi Rene,

            Look at the massive surface area and density of the fins above the water.

            I expect the drawing is incorrect and that the area above the water is at least 50%, maybe even 60% of the total volume. Then make the upper fins length 3x longer.

            • Rene

              That photo of the opened e-cat is a predecessor to the 1MW one. Not sure it applies directly. I am going to assume that the tap points of the water gauge are at the very top and bottom of the latest e-cat boiler chamber. That then suggests half the boiler chamber has water in it. The e-cat could then be placed at the 25% point (I think it is much flatter than shown in the diagram) and have asymmetric fins, taller on the topside, to maximize super heating the saturated steam.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Pweet,

        We must agree to disagree.

  • kdk

    Hopefully, the partner stays secret until the product is 1 month from release.

    • Anon2012_2014

      “Hopefully, the partner stays secret until the product is 1 month from release.”

      Hopefully NOT! The secrecy only serves to slow the adoption and penetration of LENR. We need a proud partner that is a major player by reputation (i.e. Siemens) that says “I’m In”. Then we will finally have liftoff of LENR.

      • kdk

        That’s when the sabotage goons come in to keep trillions of dollars for the bankers. They get caught doing fraud all the time for hundreds of millions or only billions of dollars, of course they’ll sabotage LENR if they can over trillions. They don’t care about humanity, but only the big numbers on their pieces of paper that they can look at and the power it affords them.

        • Anon2012_2014

          “Sabatage Goons”

          Sorry, but I don’t believe in conspiracy theories, chem trails, or the X-files.

          The most likely explanation is the simplest – Rossi and IH had a commercial dispute because of different points of view on their responsibilities within their written agreement.

          (Sorry if this dupes — Disqus just crashed and I don’t see my comment.)

          • kdk

            You don’t believe in them because you’ve never looked into them much. For example, the Zapruder film very clearly shows JFK’s head getting blown off by a shot from the grassy gnoll and everybody running towards that area searching for the assassin. The first case that I know of of one of the miracle IDs supposedly left by Oswald at the book repository, because all killers don’t want to forget their IDs during their premeditated murders. Likewise, video evidence very clearly shows chemtrails being emitted by air planes which stick around for hours and morph over days instead of minutes like contrails. The simplest explanation is that there are people who have had many, many years practicing lying and covering things up from the public, especially when hoarded money and power are involved. Hey, here’s one case where there’s lots and lots of money at stake. Also, the X-files are a bona fide fact revealed in FOIA requests, and the FBI referred to UFO’s as “Security Matter -X” early on in wires to home base, hence the X-Files.

            • Anon2012_2014


              I like science fiction and X-Files. But as a scientist, I don’t believe that those hypotheses are likely to be true.

              Chem-trails are unlikely, as is global depopulation conspiracies. Radiation from Fukushima in our oceans and food chains — that is certainly true.

              Rossi — no one in the global finance establishment is out to stop him or LENR. The most likely explanation is that Rossi is cautious bordering on paranoid and refused to supply his ex-partner IH with all the details after he found they were invested in other competitors. Possibly the machine didn’t work is the second most likely hypothesis.

              On LENR there is a conspiracy, but it is not at the level of big oil. It is the hot fusion establishment people who have so much to lose if Cold Fusion is right. 26 years ago the exchange in Science mag occurred and the Cold Fusion side was suppressed.

              What we are looking at is herd behavior where a lot of buffalo stampede towards or away from new beliefs because their neighboring buffalo have started to run. Strong evidence turns the herd of established science.

              Kennedy — no idea for sure, but suspect that CIA or Mafia was involved due to Oswald’s background. Not material to our discussion.

              • kdk

                Well, research seems like the most scientific way to determine if they’re true or not, fortunately, there’s lot of information online that can be gone through and verified. It is material to this discussion, if you believe that people won’t actively suppress technology which threatens their money. “Confessions of an Economic Hitman” details how people in the global banking circles give predatory loans to 3rd world countries so they can then go in and privatize national resources and assets when the countries are unable to pay back the loans. The list of things they have done is quite long. We’re seeing Greece being gobbled up in a fascist feeding frenzy from such predatory lending, in the last year. Here’s something important to know: they won’t be content to stop with Greece, which is just the western world’s trial run, since they already have plenty of experience doing this to 3rd world countries.

            • Timar

              How about asking Mulder and Scully to investigate the E-Cat?

          • Observer

            Fact follows fiction (think cell phone). If we have enough movies that show the world is controlled by back room conspiracies, then the next generation will think that is how things are done.

            • Mats002

              Like the columb barrier cannot be overcomed in any other way than physiscists already know about?

              • Observer

                Who needs the key to the door when you can use a sledge hammer on the wall? ;o)

                It is ironic that the “gate keepers” prefer the sledge hammer.

                • kdk

                  Yes, it really is ironic isn’t it? I wonder sometimes why they don’t just open the book on aliens but prefer to wait for chaos from all the other garbage they’ve done. It’s actually really puzzling to me. Maybe there’s some bad blood or something there, which would hardly be surprising I suppose considering the things that the elite get up to which totally disregard the value of humanity.

          • Roland

            How is belief a requirement when the internal documents of the conspirators detail exactly what has been done and why?

        • Omega Z


          There is always someone behind the scenes fighting for control or direction of technology. However, in this case, It is not the bankers who would delay this.

          It’s simple. Banks make most of their money off service fees and interest. The financing that will be required for LENR will be stupendous as will be the bankers profits.

          • kdk

            Actually the same gang of people who own the banks, also own the oil, and the media, and the politicians… it is through the banks and bribery of politicians that they got all of this control… it is the bankers, at least the super wealthy ones.

  • Robert Dorr

    Depending on the type of relationship Rossi has with his new partner they may be willing to finance Rossi’s court fight with I.H.. I’m sure Rossi knows that his court action will potentially cost much more than the million dollars he stated earlier and it wouldn’t hurt to partner up with someone with deep pockets.

    • Anon2012_2014

      If a major corporation like Siemens or GE says they are manufacturing ECATs, the side show called Industrial Heat will be settled one way or the other on the best economic terms for the manufacturer.

  • Engineer48

    I suggest we all need to understand how contracts with partners are written. As attached are the relevant “Not To Disclose” conditions imposed on the partners in the existing contract.

    If the new partner contract is anything like the attached, well don’t expect much release unless ALL parties see it is to their advantage to disclose.

    Sorry to be a wet sponge, but that is now business works.

    • Mats002

      I totally agree E48. I am an entrepeneur myself with a series of inventions, I know ‘death valley’ and what it mean to marry risk capitalists and big business.

      • Engineer48

        Hi Mats002,

        Been there myself.

  • OK so I guess you’re implying I’m being repetitive. Don’t care. I’ll be as repetitive as I need to be to swat down stupid arguments (not your post, barty, that was fine).

    And if I’m repetitive at least I’m repetitive in normal case.