Firax Tech replic series

  • I think to sum up the results of the last of an experiment.


    Exothermic reaction was still, but very weak. After removing the burnt spiral with fuel cell was discovered discharge of thermocouples with a piece of cement by about 2 mm from the surface of the reactor. On the second empty reactor, coil and a thermocouple were whole, there were only small cracks on the surface of the cement, once again, the material, the length of the resistance spirals were completely identical.
    Suppose that the difference in temperatures in the range above 1000 ° C reached ~30%, the reason for that was a defect of fastening a thermocouple on the reactor with fuel to cause rapid combustion and a spiral (1), while the other remained without evidence of deterioration (2).
    But it's the thought, intuition.


    (1)


    (2)

  • Denis I still think you have a control/process problem in a high nonlinearity area. When you bump into LENR its like lighting a match. The decay times in these isotopes delivering energy are on the order of seconds. Look Rossi is able to run in the self sustaining mode now for long periods of time. This means the controller has no effect on his process at that point & probably before. This is a very sudden high gain area you are entering. You couldn't reach 1200 set point because LENR was active below it. So you slowly come up to the ignition temperature of LENR & when you try & go above it the match goes off so to say. Temperature is thrown above setpoint & controller attempts to shutdown; if ignition point is below set point say 950 C so you probably wont go much lower if any. Thats why I think controller was acting as it did; what are your thoughts? The ignition point is probably self regulating with a very tight large gain ie you can shut power off without affecting temperature much around say 950 C but when controller is full out put you could more than double fuel element temperature & I don't think that would have much effect on self regulating LENR Fire? Could you send me you email address I'd like to try these ideas with you, Sergie & me356 as I admire your efforts & wish I were young again. I ounce worked on the Nuclear Rocket which would have put us on Elon Musk's Mars but the Vietnam War intervened & what a tragedy that was? the themal time constants of the system radiation heat transfer, vaporization & condensation of hydride, & controller tuning are working in the minutes area to filter things.
    Jim


    PS I've thought a little more about themal system steady state temperature versus power current from controller. As you rise in power temperature follows until you get to LENR ingnition point them it jumps up quit a bit on the way back down power can go to zero ( Rossi ssm) and you will still be at ignition temp which could be below set point, This is a sharp S shaped curve of very high gain that controller can' handle stabily! Just think about it for a while & get back to me when you have a minute.
    [email protected] I' try & copy this to Sergie & me 356. ;)

  • Add the translation for the presentation.

    That pulsating glow in the night on 15 second oscillation toward the end was just beautiful to watch & your confirming analysis that LENR was present very impressive. Thank you for a test, fuel element, etc very, very well done. Now lets see what other say about this great effort on your part. you as well as me356 are to be congratulated
    as well as Alan when he raps up his conclusions. Wait anxiously for the next tests.

  • Sadly, there was no calibration, so we do not know if the difference in temperatures is just an offset because of other reasons, like position of TCs, different cooling rates etc etc etc.
    The active reactor burnt out but not the dummy one, this is a good sign, but not a very confident or scientific way to conclude that it was due to lenr.
    I highly recommend switching to the water calorimetry (Parkhomov style) now that you have good results. Use the same powder and tubes. A calibration, even for calorimetry is a must.

  • Today Denis doing new experiments!
    Hopefully we'll have some news in the evening.


    From MFMP fb page


    Good luck today!

  • All the best for your new experiment. :thumbup:
    Are you writing the data in an online spreadsheet like last time ?


    Edit: If not, then please keep us updated in the chat. Some people are hanging out there including me).

  • "Denis Vasilenko ready to run a Parkhomov-style 1g Nickel + 0.1 LiAlH4 in a heated ceramic tube test.


    The power will be supplied by 50Hz sine wave - given suggestions that fast current rise time might be important, it may be interesting to see what the result is."


    ..besides the current frequency variable, which has been changed to 50 Hz.
    Are there other changes in the parkpomov experimental conditions?

  • Experiment of 17 July
    The total time of the experiment 18 hours


    The fuel composition
    Carbonyl nickel of 5 microns - about 1g
    LAH - 0.1g
    Important! Nickel capsule walls do not touch walls of the tube, thermocouple concerned only the capsule wall.
    Precise data on the ceramic tube is not, but it is known that it is vacuum-tight.
    Heater power AC frequency of 50 Hz, the adjustment occurred by increasing the amplitude of the input signal to the power amplifier.





    https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BwOvQOFw_ekBfmxlUWs1Zk41OTZwcjVfRnktbnc3THNUN2pEamVlSzF5X2U2LXUxZkVqVkk&usp=sharing
    Now the graphs, to the right watts power readings (input - orange bar, output - green) temperature scale left - yellow readings.





    Deviation 8% calorimeter (power loss 7-8%), with maximum temperatures of minimum loss was 1.5%.
    The main question today - why such anomalies thermocouple? The graphs clearly show that even at a temperature of 1200C to sharp differences arose. Maybe someone faced with a similar and will be able to explain? While come to mind thoughts of mundane problems thermocouple inside the tube.

  • The audio power amplifier was a great idea! They are not that expensive and you can control the output using the volume. With them, it is not difficult to measure and to automatically control the power applied to the reactor - the electronics needed are not hard to build using cheap off-the-shelf components.

  • Experiments by MFMP have suggested that there is a possibility of electrical leakage between the heater coil wrapped around the outside of the reactor tube and a thermocouple placed inside if the heater power supply is not isolated. Apparently it can arise as the conductivity of the alumina increases with temperature forming an electrical path. Possibly the anomalies in the thermocouple are due to electrical interference? Did you post details about the electrics of the experiment setup?


    Just trying to understand the experiment setup. From the pictures, did you use a copper pipe coil for the calorimetry?


    Without the raw data it is a little difficult to tell but the calorimetry output follows the input power fairly closely. I don't see any obvious signs of excess heat.

  • Thanks Denis. The calibration looks smooth in the range 250-400°C, so there is surely something happening with the fuel in that range.
    However, I'm not sure why it doesn't show up as excess heat. Probably the heat peaks are local and the calorimeter smoothed them out by integration of total heat. ?( (Edit: Assuming no error with TC)

  • Experiments by MFMP have suggested that there is a possibility of electrical leakage between the heater coil wrapped around the outside of the reactor tube and a thermocouple placed inside if the heater power supply is not isolated. Apparently it can arise as the conductivity of the alumina increases with temperature forming an electrical path. Possibly the anomalies in the thermocouple are due to electrical interference? Did you post details about the electrics of the experiment setup?


    Just trying to understand the experiment setup. From the pictures, did you use a copper pipe coil for the calorimetry?


    Without the raw data it is a little difficult to tell but the calorimetry output follows the input power fairly closely. I don't see any obvious signs of excess heat.


    Copper tube used, previously were also similar experiments, but without calorimeter, there just was not abnormal heat and anomalies with thermocouple. Now there are a few guesses, one of them is a connection with hydrogen and air, condensation.