PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2021-02-28, 13:23:25
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Author Topic: Serbian Professor Savic Sonic water heater replication COP 12  (Read 294048 times)
Group: Guest
Chet:

Quote
50 liter of water rise 30 deg celsius in one h
Quote
COP = 1,74 / 0,360 = 4,83
Quote
This setup based on IKEA thermos.

It all sounds very impressive but I have never seen a 50 liter thermos, have you?  Perhaps it's a language issue?  How come apparently nobody has asked him for pictures?  My cynical side says to me that perhaps "Daemonbart" is a shill for "Mr. C" or is an alter-ego of "Mr. C."

Quoting Slovenia:

Quote
This device does work! The problem is having the smarts to harness it's power and apply it in a real life application. This device makes a lot of heat and with pulsed DC current, a lot of hydrogen. This device makes a lot of heat even when not tuned properly. When tuned properly to the prescribed values, it make a lot of heat very efficiently. So, we know the device works, what do we do with it?

I have been glancing at the thread and except for alleged data from "Daemonbart" I haven't seen any real data from you or Slovenia or any of the other contributors to the thread.  If you guys are trying to be serious then in my opinion Slovenia should retract his statement because it is way too premature.  You guys need three separate replications with real data, multiple runs per replication. photographs and documentation on how you made your measurements, etc, etc.  In other words, at the same level of a Grade 12 chemistry lab report.

On the other hand, if this is all some kind of fantasy play for you and you just want to have fun until you get bored of the whole thing, then carry on.

MileHigh
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
MH
I posted the math for scrutiny ,Is it accurate ? In other words,

Can the information presented..... be used in this formula ,to accurately state this Ikea thermos mounted inside a 50 liter vessel
is going OU??

Thanka
Chet
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
Chet,

Stay safe and make sure you use a GFCI outlet for your experiments.  Water and electricity are very dangerous, that's why those outlets are placed in bathrooms and the kitchen, near possible sources of water.
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
Thanks EM

I have worked all my life around water and electricity... BIG D.C.600 volts Zillion amps  [subway Third Rail and wet diamond core drilling] electricity............
But you are correct ...........

BTW
This device I am posting stats on ............

It works better than advertised ,I am hoping one of the replicators can Man up and do the right thing?
However we have enough info now to get it working??

We shall see............
   
Group: Guest
Chet:

The math was fine and it's all based on the fact that it takes 4.19 (Some say 4.18) Joules of energy to produce one Calorie of heat energy.  I know math is not your strong suit so I suggest that you work with your friends on the thread to make a step-by-step template for yourself so you can simply punch in the numbers and get your results.

I am not sure what an "Ikea thermos mounted inside a 50 liter vessel" really means.  Daemonbart seems to be implying a "30 liter thermos" in his posting, which I can't understand but like I said perhaps English is not his native language.

Your preliminary calculations were based on a single tick of your Kill-a-Watt meter and you may recall that I posted that the fewer ticks your Kill-a-Watt meter makes the less accurate it is.  I suggested that your results should be based on at least 100 ticks of the Kill-a-Watt meter to be accurate.  Perhaps you can come up with some kind of strategy to compensate or work around this issue with your associates on the thread.

Nor have I seen any attempt by anyone on the thread to deal with the issue of the thermal mass of the container itself.  You are never just heating up water, you are also heating up the container holding the water.  If you guys collectively ignore that issue so be it.

Nor have I seen anyone discuss their methods for thermally isolating their experiment from the outside world, whether that be isolating the bottom of your container from a table top or whatever.  How can you possibly do thermal tests without even discussing this important issue on your thread?

Also, trying to make an estimate of your margin of error is critical in any experiment.  i.e.,  "I calculate my COP as 1.7 +/- 20%," or whatever, but I know that's a tall request because you almost never ever see that on the forums for any experiments, period.

In my way of thinking, "part of the fun" is to tackle these issues and do better experiments.

Anyway, three replications from three different experimenters with multiple runs per replication, photographs, documenting of the procedures followed, control runs with a standard water heater, where each experimental run's data is crunched down to a COP value would be a reasonable requirement for this proposition.  To be a pain, I will state again, produce reports comarable to a Grade 12 chemistry lab experiment.  I don't think that's asking for too much.

By the way, what happened to the standard little resistive "coffee cup" water heater that you said you purchased?  I saw some pictures of a 110 VAC light bulb immersed in a big jar filled with water.  What's up with that?

Sorry for the "scolding" but it never hurts for you guys to push yourselves to do better and get better results.  If nobody asks Daeomonbart for the stuff I listed above then I don't know what to say.  All that I can hope for is that you do real experiments and get past saying that your data is preliminary, it's time for all of you to start doing definitive experiments and stand by your data.  If you don't get to that point, the thread will just meander and go nowhere, and sink lower and lower until it is off the front page for good and dies.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2011-12-04, 21:41:26 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
MH
Don't be like the guy that went up to Michael Angelo when He was Priming the Sistine Chapel ceiling and said
""Hey, I thought you said you could Paint""

I am doing no more than establishing the very beginning steps of how we will do Calorimetry!

An Offshoot of that was for the fellows doing experiments with the Wesley team device.
They are Running Light bulbs ,And are having a hard time establishing power in power out measurements [impossible IMO]
so I suggested just plug your rig into a Killowatt meter configure your light bulb the way that I did , and do a test run ,Hot water and no reading on the Killowatt meter would give some credence to
Further Scrutiny ...............


Back to my Boiler testing,

My methods are just fine for a baseline.Once we start testing Tuned Rigs that are supposed to heat water 500% faster... the rest will fall into place.

One problem I would like to ask about is that Killowatt meter needing to have more of a run for accuracy ?? I diminished my Container size to 1 liter because others
commented the need to "Get it done" fast for environmental Loss issues?[and rightly so]
I do however like to play with one liter of water as there is so much published Data for comparison on heating one liter..........

I don't feel like doing a closed Calorimetry vessel !
especially since at the claimed efficiencies it should be Moot............If I bring one liter to boil in 5 minutes with my Teapot heater and do the same thing in One minute with
the serbian boiler at the same input power
Case Closed.............

Thanks for looking and any comments are always appreciated [especially with the Math,I only have so many Toes  !=,.}

Chet
   
Group: Guest
Chet:

Quote
One problem I would like to ask about is that Killowatt meter needing to have more of a run for accuracy ?? I diminished my Container size to 1 liter because others
commented the need to "Get it done" fast for environmental Loss issues?[and rightly so]
I do however like to play with one liter of water as there is so much published Data for comparison on heating one liter........

They are dead wrong about getting it done faster with a smaller container being the better way to go.  The larger the container the higher the ratio of volume to surface area.  Therefore you should get inherently better results with a larger container.  With the high power levels you are working with, there should be no problem working with larger volumes of water.  But even with a larger container if you're not going to try to do at least some basic thermal isolation then it looks really bad for you as an experimenter.  Even if you think it won't matter because of your allegedly high COP, you should still try to address the thermal isolation issues.  My God, you can't just get some lousy bubble wrap and wrap two layers (not one!) of it around your container?

Quote
especially since at the claimed efficiencies it should be Moot............If I bring one liter to boil in 5 minutes with my Teapot heater and do the same thing in One minute with
the serbian boiler at the same input power

You wish, but let's see if anybody on the team asks Daemonbart about the details about his tests that generated his magic COP number.  Don't be surprised if his test and measurement procedure has more holes in it than a Swiss cheese.  You guys have to break the pattern of blindly accepting your peer's over unity claims like a bunch of drones.  You are one of the worst offenders when it comes to that Chet.

Look at this quote from the user Ares123:

Quote
Deamonbart claims good results but he does not show us measurements(not that he should, but would be nice)

Wake up boys, Daemonbart has just upset the laws of the Universe and he doesn't have to show his measurements?  Are you guys in a Marx Brother's movie or are you trying to be serious and scientific here?

MileHigh
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
Measuring twice... Marking with a crayon.... and cutting with an ax
Until I see a good reason to put down the hatchet..............

This isn't claimed to be a few percent better than conventional systems
Its 100's of percent better............
I will leave the flea nose hair micrometer in the glass case for now!!

Just for now.....
Thanks
Chet



   
Group: Guest
Chet:

Quote
I will leave the flea nose hair micrometer in the glass case for now!!

That's fine but if nobody questions Daemonbart about his results and just accepts them because he made a 10-line posting then the whole thing is a farce and you may as well pack it in.

MileHigh
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1104
Testing question??
I am getting prepared to run some tests on 220 volts.

Since this will be a pure resistance application how will I test this without buying a special killowatt meter?
  Can I just use 2 110 V killowatt meters one on each leg and then connect them to the device on the other side?? [phasing issues??]  ???
Of course I'll just add total watts consumed together for my input power.
Am I making sense here ?
Comments please

Thanks
Chet
PS
I am actually building two devices that run this way one is a 110 device  the other is a replication from an anonymous experimenter of Savics boiler but made from stainless and running on 220 here

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8999-peter-daysh-davey-water-heater-query-33.html
Here is a spreadsheet which has been applied to your EnergeticForum #1166 results.
Runs 5, 6 and 7 seem to show improvements as the gap is reduced. It would be good
to see the current and voltage measurements.
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2810
Dumped
Thank you for the link ,very cool ![or hot]
Thanks to the fellows here I have a fairly acceptable test Procedure!!
And I am having fun...............
The Savic device is going up to Bat shortly!!

Here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/8999-peter-daysh-davey-water-heater-query-33.html
Chet
PS
 Farrah ......... and Grumpy
I build Now !!

Thanks, Chet -- I went to the EF link and did some reading.  Sounds interesting, needing replications / careful measurements. 

Slovenia says, with alacrity:

Quote
We have a lot of smart minds on this thread. This is a very easy device to make. It's not at all complicated. Many of you are so intelligent that you can't believe in this device because of it's simplicity. Even my untuned American pop can with a European sized ring boiled water very fast. I wanted to jump the gun and see what this device would do. Even though simple, we have all the necessary information to replicate this device and have something very good to use. So, my recommendation is to build the device to the inventor's specs first before you try something else. I would suggest using either stainless steel or titanium for the ring however. The tin can metal ring I made was for proof of concept only and it got rusty while being used during the first trial.


  So I'd like to try this.  Uses calorimetry for measuring heat output, energy output, which I like.
Now, Chet, can you point me to HOW to build this? any instructions?  my email, emdevice12@yahoo.com
  I have "American pop cans", but how about the required ring and how it is set up, and how one "tunes" it...  sounds fun.  Note though, I'm from Missouri...
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
Holy cow
Paul
Is that my test data??

Collated and correlated ??
??

WOW!!
Wait till Slovenia sees this!!
Thanks!!

@Steve
I will be Emailing you.............
Paul
It would be good if you can PM your Email to me!!

  
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1104
Holy cow
Paul
Is that my test data??

Collated and correlated ??
??


That's all your research results culled from Post 1166 on Energetic forum.
I would have put the spreadsheet there, but they don't allow spreadsheet
attachments for some reason.

I put in your latest result (50 litres, 30 deg C etc), and it confirms your result of COP 4.84

Excellent stuff, Ramset.
   
Group: Guest
Paul-R:

Quote
I put in your latest result (50 litres, 30 deg C etc), and it confirms your result of COP 4.84

Do you have that information somewhere because it's not in the spreadsheet you posted?

I looked at the spreadhseet that you posted in reply #238 and it's got an unusual set of data points:

Quote
- Heat generated-    - Run 1 -     - Run 2 -
Litres =   2.00   200.00
Temp rise =   21.00   30.00
      
Heat, Joules, =   175560.00   25080000.00
      
      
 - Electric supplied -      
Current, I =      
Voltage, V =   110.00   110.00
Time, secs =   600.00   
      
Elect, Joules, =   0.00   0.00
      
COP =   #DIV/0!   #DIV/0!
      
Elec, KWH   0.06   0.08
COP =   0.81   87.08

You go from 0.06 KWh to heat 2 liters by 21 degrees to 0.08 KWh to heat 200 liters by 30 degrees.  In both cases the gap is listed as 2 mm.  The COP goes from 0.81 to 87.08.   It doesn't make sense.

As I said before, KWh measurements of 0.03, 0.05, 0.06 etc are not accurate enough to work with.  You have to figure out how to make more accurate power measurements with the existing Kill-a-Watt meter somehow or find a work-around or go to a different measuring scheme or something.  The problem is not going to go away by ignoring it.

MileHigh
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1104
Paul-R:

Do you have that information somewhere because it's not in the spreadsheet you posted?

I looked at the spreadhseet that you posted in reply #238 and it's got an unusual set of data points:

You go from 0.06 KWh to heat 2 liters by 21 degrees to 0.08 KWh to heat 200 liters by 30 degrees.  In both cases the gap is listed as 2 mm.  The COP goes from 0.81 to 87.08.   It doesn't make sense.

As I said before, KWh measurements of 0.03, 0.05, 0.06 etc are not accurate enough to work with.  You have to figure out how to make more accurate power measurements with the existing Kill-a-Watt meter somehow or find a work-around or go to a different measuring scheme or something.  The problem is not going to go away by ignoring it.

MileHigh
That data is in a previous post above, #228, not on the spreadsheet.

You are quite right about the COP of 87. The litres capacity got set as 200 by mistake. Sorry about
that. If people alter the 200 to 2, it will go right.

I agree that the KWH measurements should be more accurate. It would be good to see measurments
of the exact local voltage (which can vary across the day, and often in the ad breaks of popular TV
programmes as people rush out to put on their kettles) and the AC current.

Also, and MOST IMPORTANT, it is essential that before temperature readings are taken, the vessel
is stirred very thoroughly to ensure that the temperature is uniform.

Paul-R
« Last Edit: 2011-12-06, 16:03:52 by Paul-R »
   
Group: Guest
Chet:

Quote
RAMSET
        
A nice Vid about Resonance

Resonance The Truth - YouTube

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8iUUbuTBuY[/youtube]

Chet

lol  You are so funny, you are never going to give up on your fantasies and dreams about resonance, are you?

If only they were true!!!!!

MileHigh
   

Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 1787
"I don't know why this hasn't been discovered yet"...

Because there is nothing interesting there.

Is there any wonder why some folks just don't respond to such claims?

Could it be the shear volume of repeated claims from newbies and folks totally outside of their normal experience?

He assumes there is no current flow because there is only one wire. If he had the correct equipment and know-how he would be able to measure the current flowing from the signal generator to the circuit (and back).

This video is more about capacitance than resonance.


---------------------------
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Einstein

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." - Werner Heisenberg
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
Sometimes I feel like a one legged man in an ASss Kickin contest?

Here is the rest Of the story [Paul Harvey]

Tinsel Koala
Response  To the above Vid

Very nice work, Brian ! You are on the right track, IMHO.

However, you have a couple of things to think about and to test.

There is a ground, probably. Most function generators and other bench equipment like oscilloscopes will have their chassis ground wired to the ground plug of the 3-wire line cord (the green wire). Even the neutral wire (the white one) can wind up providing a ground to earth in some cases. This means, at the relatively high frequencies you are dealing with, you are surrounded by the system ground in your house wiring and the Earth. This, by the way, is how Tesla coil enthusiasts manage to light up 25 watt incandescent bulbs with only one wire connected to anything. Your handheld meter won't show any power coming from the function generator thru the one wire -- it's optimized for a much lower AC frequency, but there are ways to show that there is, using your oscilloscope.

You might be surprised on how much your stray wiring "layout" will affect things, even at 5 MHz.  May I suggest the following:
First, before changing anything, try to figure out some way to isolate (just for this one test) your function generator from your housewiring ground. If you have a computer UPS, you can try  running the FG with it (unplugged from the line of course!) for a few minutes. See if you are still able to tune in and light the LEDs. Second, scope the signal at the big red LED  -- if your FG ground is still isolated you should be able to do this and still tune in the power. I'd like to see the waveform here.

If you look at my YT channel you can find a couple of videos that are relevant to your work.

(Nice little coils by the way. I wonder why you used syringes, rather than, say, toilet paper rolls or medicine bottles.)



------------------------------------------------------------------
THX
Chet
   

Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 1787
Chet,

Please don't take offense from my rant. It wasn't meant for you.

It just becomes tiring to see the same 'great' discoveries over and over. Sometimes I wonder if these folks do any checking before making claims.

There is lots of weird stuff out there for folks to rediscover. No matter how weird it may seem a little research should happen before the repeated embarrassing YouTube video.


---------------------------
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Einstein

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." - Werner Heisenberg
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
Wave watcher
No offence ,a mere Bruise............

I have to have thick skin in this game!!
Thanks For looking and commenting!!

Chet 
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
Some Numbas
  

I have done many temperature tests and doing it almost everyday! I will post the requested data later today.. 60l temp rise in 5 min with 1kW input.

That will be the same as 83Wh, with""" resistance heater""" and no loss the water should rise 0,87 K, in real it will rise only 0,7x0,87 = 0,6 K

We will see what I can do with my sonic setup

Kind rgds D


Results!
I promised to post results for """sonic boiler:""""

5 min 1kW, temp rise in 60l water: total input from grid = 83 Wh, temp rise = 4,2 K. Result with resistance heater 0,6 K. COP = 4,2/0,6 = 7  

Kind rgds D

------------------------------
Summary

Identical Input power...... Identical time  Same volume of water

Resistance heater temp rise 0.87k    Cop= 0.6

Sonic boiler temp rise 4.2k   Cop  =  7

Thanks
Chet

  
« Last Edit: 2011-12-19, 23:49:33 by ramset »
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1104
60l temp rise in 5 min with 1kW input............the water should rise 0,87 K

Are you measuring the water in litres and the temperature in degrees K ?

If so, what is your specific heat?

If you are using 4.18, then you need to use cc (or litres and multiply by
1000) and degrees centigrade.

Paul-R
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
Paul
I am not sure what "K" is?

However if the same equation  is used for both calculations


??

The short story is
HOLY COW!!!! :o :o :o :o :o :o   [thats a 6 shocked smiley's out of a possible 10]

Thanks
Chet
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
Energy delivered = (1000 J/s) x (5 min) x (60 s/min) = 300 000  Joules

Specific Heat of water = 4.186 Joules/gram/degree C   (or degree K)  (STP conditions)

60 liters of water = 60 x (1000 grams/ liter) = 60 000 grams.

Temperature change = (300 000 J) / (4.186) / (60 000) = 1.194 deg C, or K


So,  if you raised the water by 4.2 deg K,   then that would be a good indicator of OU.    Good job.

EM

PS,  I wonder if any exotermic reactions occur in the water to account for this excess heat?  :-\
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3468
EM
You have always been an inspiration!
As always with these types of things,People have a lot to think about [the inventors] ?
In this case however ...its not just one inventor ...its not even one device...
Its a combination of The TK ,Tiger, Whatever device?? but instead of feeding a light Bulb
He's feeding the boiler...................

Amazing stuff happening here!!

Thanks
Chet
« Last Edit: 2011-12-20, 18:08:48 by ramset »
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2021-02-28, 13:23:25