The Central Importance of Calibration
|December 16, 2015||Posted by Jack Cole under Andrea Rossi, E-Cat|
The third party reports examining Rossi’s E-Cat technology both produced apparently positive results. Unfortunately, they both suffered the same problem: they lacked an adequate calibration. TPR1 used a separate dummy device and ran only at a lower temperature level. TPR2 used the same device without fuel, but did not run to the same temperature or input power levels used in the active run. MFMP was able to demonstrate why this very likely led to invalid results for TPR2.
It is not possible to make scientific conclusions about a study of excess heating that does not include an adequate calibration run of the device without fuel (even if you use calorimetry). My primary concern with Rossi’s work is the possibility that he has never adequately used null run comparisons. The null run allows you to take into account potential systematic sources of error. It must be performed across the full temperature and power ranges under which the device operates.
Followers of my past experiments will note that I have been excited about potential excess heat in the past, only to discover that calibration error accounted for the apparent excess heat. Perhaps someone can correct me, but I do not recall a single demonstration by Rossi which included any type of calibration. This is the most likely route that his results will turn out to be negative, assuming the results are not positive.