From: Andre Blum
Can anyone on this forum comment on the True RMS meter that was used? The link Frank supplied seems to suggest that one of its applications is to find unexpected high currents. A true RMS meter of any kind is NOT sufficient in this situation. A dedicated power analyzer must be used, if we are dealing with a duty-cycle correction or spiky input, as appears to be the case. We saw this problem clearly back years ago with Naudin's MAHG, which is actually a very similar device to e-cat, except in the use of tungsten instead of nickel. Naudin, who is quite experienced with prototypes and actually worked for EDF (French grid utility) at the time - nevertheless measured input power with a systemic 20:1 error. (gives one confidence in your power bill, if you are French, n'est pas?). How did it happen? George or Terry may have a better recollection but IIRC Naudin was pulsing the input power at low duty. He measured voltage and current, but the current was across a shunt and the voltage was seen on the PS meter. The duty cycle was 5%, so to make the duty cycle correction, Naudin then multiplied voltage x current x 20, when he should have corrected only the voltage - as the current was actual. Thus, he saw a most remarkable COP of 20, when it was actually a COP of one; with a systemic error of twenty. Actually it is not that simple - but had Naudin used a dedicated power analyzer, there would have been no doubt in the results, which would have been far less remarkable. AFAIK - despite years of pleading that error still appears on Naudin's site. Is Rossi (or his "expert" colonel) doing something similar? Probably. Jones
