On the Cooling of the QuarkX

Thanks to Bernie Koppenhofer for highlighting this interesting exchange from the Journal of Nuclear Physics that seems to shed some light on the role of the control system with the QuarkX modules. Andrea Rossi has reported recently that they have had to cut the power rating (from 100W to 20W), and increase the volume of individual QuarkX units to avoid an overheating problem that has been occurring.

Dennis Smith
November 24, 2016 at 7:22 AM
Dr Andrea Rossi
If I have well understood, you alternate the on and off switch period of the Quarkxes to have a constant power, but, at the same time, a proper cooling period for each Quarkx. Your problem is that you have a too high temperature in a too small volume, so that the heat exchanging surface is not enough to remove the heat on time before the meltdown. Did I get it?
Have a great Thanksgiving Day,
Dennis

Andrea Rossi
November 24, 2016 at 7:53 AM
Dennis Smith:
You are correct.
Warm Regards,
A.R.

  • fusionrudy

    There is a new proposal from the University of Bristol to produce batteries by fabricating diamonds from Carbon-14 nuclear waste. These batteries would have lifetimes in the order of hundreds of years but have very low power:
    “The team reckons that a diamond battery containing about 1 g of carbon-14 would deliver about 15 joules per day. A standard 20 g AA battery could sustain this power for about 2.5 years, whereas the diamond battery would last hundreds of years without a significant drop in output.”
    http://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2016/november/diamond-power.html

  • Jas

    From the JONP:
    Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
    Probably you do not know that Mr La Gatta, of ENEA, Italian taxpayer maintained concern, is now working for IH in Raleigh. They are trying to make up a competition against you, using the information IH gave to La Gatta and ENEA to replicate your technology. This all is finalized to get from Italian Government funds graciously supplied from the taxpayer of Italy, to steal your technology, and, at the same time, to fool the investors of IH, Cherokee Fund Partners and Woodford, making them believe that there is a big team making big things, where big things stand for stealing your IP.
    From an insider,
    have a great week, Andrea!
    Giuseppe

    Rossi’s reply to this post was “Wow”

    • Jas

      Rossi normally says “No Comment” when asked questions about IH.

  • sam

    Gian Luca
    November 28, 2016 at 5:42 AM
    Carissimo A.R.
    What will happen in the next year?
    Try to explain the new goals of Andrea & his staff.
    Grazie

    Andrea Rossi
    November 28, 2016 at 7:07 AM
    Gian Luca:
    What will happen, only God knows. What we aim to is:
    1- important publication
    2- presentation of the QuarkX
    3- start of the industrial production in he USA and in Sweden
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    JPR
    November 28, 2016 at 5:46 AM
    Update?

    Andrea Rossi
    November 28, 2016 at 7:04 AM
    JPR:
    Again returned to a stable and good standing situation toward Sigma5.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    Ronald
    November 27, 2016 at 5:36 PM
    Dr Andrea Rossi:
    1- was property of the ERV the flowmeter by means of which have been made the measurements on the 1 MW plant?
    2- did the ERV himself install it?
    3- have ever been installed beside it any other flowmeters by IH or Leonardo?
    Cheers,
    Ron

    Translate
    Andrea Rossi
    November 27, 2016 at 5:59 PM
    Ronald:
    1- yes
    2- yes
    3- no
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Dr. Mike

    Having to reduce the power from 100W to 20W because of over-heating issues represents a serious problem for assembling a large cluster of QuarkX’s to create a high power heater. It will be hard to form a 3-dimensional array of devices without having interior devices overheating. Also, the minimal spacing between devices in a 2-dimensional array will be an issue in achieving a compact high power heater. It would reasonable to expect a considerable delay in developing a useful high or moderate power heater formed of clusters of QuarkX’s while heat transfer issues are being resolved.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Brilliant Light Power eliminate tungsten electrode vaporisation problem by replacing their function with two streams of molten Silver.

    Canny!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUBheBH9eio

    Of course, in our view, the silver is the Protium carrier medium and the part of the system (when it condenses to suspended nano particulates) that does a lot of the high energy photon down-conversion.

  • Steve Swatman

    It sounds Mr Rossi it too much ahead of time, he has created some new materials for his toys and they are still not capable of dealing with the excess heat of his “Rossi effect” quarkx’s, I would say this is good news in as much as the heat is been generated, forward and onward.

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Andrea Rossi November 26, 2016 at 11:40 AM
    JPR:
    Today one QuarK stopped to work suddenly, we are studying the reason of it.
    Warm Regards, A.R.”

    • sam

      JPR
      November 27, 2016 at 7:43 AM
      Dear Andrea Rossi:
      Have you been able to resolve the problem of the broken QuarkX?
      Will this event delay the presentation of it?
      Thank you for your daily updates and your immense work,
      JPR

      Andrea Rossi
      November 27, 2016 at 8:28 AM
      JPR:
      Yes, we resolved the problem and understood it in full yesterday night. It was a problem in the control system, not in the QuarkX. No delays for it.
      F8.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

      toussaint
      November 27, 2016 at 3:25 AM
      Dear Andrea Rossi,

      I am glad that you think to find the reason for the sudden stop of the QUARKX,
      I hope it wont stop the progression to reaching SIGMA 5.

      Warm regards,

      Toussaint françois

      Translate
      Andrea Rossi
      November 27, 2016 at 8:26 AM
      Toussaint:
      No, it will not delay the scheduling, so far.
      F8.
      Warm Regards,
      A.R.

  • artefact

    On JONP:

    “Andrea Rossi November 25, 2016 at 10:43 PM
    Roslyn Abrams:
    Woodford visited the plant during the test in February 2015 and in
    September 2015: when they invested 50 million dollars in IH the sole
    license and intellectual property that IH had was the one of Leonardo
    Corporation. The top level officers that Woodford sent to visit the
    plant during the test had at their disposal the first and the second
    querterly report made by the ERV. The fourth and last quarterly report,
    as well as the third, were substantially equal to the first and the
    second. IH has also paid the invoices related to the first, the second
    and the third report of the ERV. Eventually, they did not pay the fourth
    report, because they said it was not correct. But it was equal to the
    former three, related to the period during which IH collected funds from
    their investors. At the end of the second visit to the plant of 1 MW
    during the test, in September 2015, the senior officer of Woodford said
    to me the following precise words: ” Congratulations, Dr Rossi, we saw
    great stuff here”.
    Warm Regards, A.R.”

  • cashmemorz

    This carries similar sense of what the recently advertised “first sex robot ” (SR) makes one think. Both the ecat and the SR give a sense of unreality. Both are “sexy” technology. Just that the e-cat has more meaning to a person in terms of long term impact, where with the SR, one knows there will never be more than an illusion of usefulness. With the e-cat all the information leads one to surmise there is something there, but so far its all talk and no action. Both border on the line between reality and unreality. With both one hopes there is something there that means something. If some one can get a working version of either technology and try it then one will know if it is worthwhile. Currently we have is frustration with either one of these tech.

  • pg

    See you all in March

  • sam

    Andrea Rossi
    November 25, 2016 at 1:29 PM
    Tom Conover:
    Thank you: without the sustain of my Faith, I would have been buried in the nineties. I got from there my force.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    Joe Klecko
    November 25, 2016 at 5:31 AM
    Dear Andrea:
    As of today, how many probabilities are there that within February 2017 important information will be released concerning your work?

    Andrea Rossi
    November 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM
    Joe Klecko:
    I’d say between 60 and 70%.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

    JPR
    November 25, 2016 at 5:33 AM
    Update?

    Andrea Rossi
    November 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM
    JPR:
    Good standing resists.
    Warm Regards,
    A.R.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    R&D is an iterative process. This is following a normal timeline.

  • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

    “You are correct.” is now an “interesting exchange”?

    Sorry, but it’s obvious to the stop that Rossi is asking these questions himself or asking someone to ask exactly this since months.

    • Timar

      Don’t be so harsh on Rossi, barty. Just try to imagine all those loney nights locked inside a shipping container, isolated, without any company. He must have created all those “sock puppets” as a psychological survival strategy to deal with the isolation.

      • http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/ barty

        So somber this sounds: I slowly begin to believe that Rossi has some psychological health problems.
        This may be because he had a delusion of grandeur and is now repressing the reality by doing such strange things.

        • Brokeeper

          Even Rossi can get into a paridym rut. He himself recognized this by calling upon a retired Navy Engineer he new from the past to pull him out. This is a sign of a a very healthy mind, knowing one’s limitations and humble enough to turn for help.

          • malkom700

            The main question is whether Rossi has something or not. If he has, we are willing to forgive him all the to date setbacks.

        • Stephen

          I can understand your frustration Barty if you have been following for 7 years. It takes heroic effort to be patient so long I’m amazed and impressed by the “sustain” of so many who follow the story frankly. They are heroes in their own way and I hope (and some how already believe) that AR and others appreciate them what ever their individual view points.

          But honestly based on my experience I think it’s also realistic. To take a complex engineering project from concept to marketable device even with well known technology can take years a satellite for example could take 10 years or more to develope I suppose it’s similar for a car a robot or many such high tech devices.

          It’s a pity we could not see proof of concept devices or engineering models to satisfy our hopes we are following something important and real. But I suspect from his comments that the underlying principles are quite straightforward once understood and the only protection AR has for his invention is to invent and make a very smart device based on the technology that he can market massively that is in it self not practical to compete against.

          I have only been following a coupe of years so it relatively easy for me I suppose but sincerely hope we do see something to satisfy our curiosities soon.

          I guess we will all celibrate that day what every each one of us believes about it today.

        • f sedei

          The ongoing court case may answer your concerns.

        • Mylan

          I sometimes feel the same way.

          But then you have to remember the Lugano test. And while there are some questionmarks concernig the methods, it does not seem to be Rossi’s fault. It seems that he does believe in his device and wanted an independent test.

          Also, he did convince IH to invest. And he did perform the one year test. And he is confident enough to sue because he believes that he met the criteria.

          So overall, while I’m also disappointed as I have awaited a product in the market years ago, it is not like there was no development of the story.

          • Omega Z

            Actually, the yesys done on the flanged Hot cat Ferrara, Italy was almost coompletely flawless. Emissivity and input/output we’re correctly measured. The only thing not officially ruled out was D.C. voltage. However, one schooled in the differences in AC/DC and how things react differently when miss applied know that there was no DC energy supplied.

            The reason there has been delays in this technology is having the necessary control to produce a marketable product. It has always been about control.

        • http://www.facebook.com/hiteshceon Hitesh Ceon

          I was under the impression that most of the people following the e-Cat saga(including myself), were not introduced to it before the January 2011 demonstration. That is almost 6 years, not 7. But perhaps you heard of it earlier? It is nevertheless a long time, and my hope to see anything real(product on the market, published papers in major scientific journals, a convincing open independent third party test/demonstration) come out of this, have become almost non-existent. But can’t help myself but to check the latest e-cat news anyhow, now and then.

          • Omega Z

            Barty just can’t keep the facts straight. You are correct. Almost 6 years.

    • Gerard McEk

      Barty, I agree that AR has not yet really proven that the E-cats, Hot-cats, E-catX and QuarkX’s really work. Till now he has always said that the customers will be the proof. If these cats don’t do what he promises, then AR can build as many factories as he wants, but he wouldn’t sell much. So a really independent test by e.g. MFMP or a trustworthy commercial company speciallized in testing and certifying will be needed to clear him of any suspicion and open the the world for the cats.

    • Omega Z

      I can only laugh when someone makes such statements.

      It is obvious you feel no one in the LENR community is capable of asking such questions. Therefore, these must be a work of Rossi.

  • Brokeeper

    This gives us some insight of the controlled cluster configuration. While also understanding not all QuarkX modules within a cluster require direct individual electrical control:
    Gerard McEk: 1. “Don’t individual Quark’s need an individual electric control connection if used in a cluster?”
    Andrea Rossi: 1- “no”;
    may imply a cat/mouse synergetic configuration with a electric control connected on/off QX center ‘mouse’ limiting the sum entropy of surrounding non-connected cats. Maybe a honeycomb-like form?

    • Gerard McEk

      Indeed, that was my conclusion too. The interesting thing is how exactly this works and how it can be controlled. If somehow the central ‘mouse’ uses the generated electrical voltage to control the e.g. 6 surrounding QuarkX’s than it can switch also these. Maybe using a high temperature insulator can avoid that neighbouring mini clusters also are switched. To me this seems still complex. Another possibility is that EM fields of the same property as are generated by the QuarkX can also control the QuarkX.

    • Rene

      His ‘no’ merely implies some part of that statement was false, mostly likely that the quarkcats are electrically driven individually. And cat/mouse is looking far less than some physical arrangement of quarkcats and more like the two reactions that have been discussed here in the past. A plausible answer, one to ask Rossi, is that in a cluster the quarkcats get driven in common or in groups.