Mizuno reports increased excess heat

Heat is heat. If the system is sufficiently exothermic to overcome losses, and sufficient heat is returned to the reactor from the cooling system (if there is one), the reactor will run without further electrical heater input. If the returned heat is excessive, thermal runaway will occur, absent a controlled, forced cooling system or some way to control the generated heat. Control of generated heat is not, as I recall, a convenient thing to do with Mizuno's reactors.

What I would like to see (and kick me if it's there somewhere) is a list of runs, for R20 at least, for each run, how long the runs were, how much input power was used and excess power produced, plotted against time and also the total energy for that run. I know that's a lot of time and work if there are a lot of runs.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

Heat is heat. If the system is sufficiently exothermic to overcome losses, and sufficient heat is returned to the reactor from the cooling system (if there is one), the reactor will run without further electrical heater input.

But IR radiated from the heater to the mesh is not the same as the heat generated by the reaction and conducted through the mesh. If the mesh temperature is all that is important, then any version with high COP should self-sustain. But I get the impression that will not happen with this reactor, meaning the IR radiation is the key to making it work.

If we get data with heater power on and off, that would help understand whether or not IR from the heater is important. If IR is important, that gives an avenue to understand the experiment more. What frequency gives best performance? Is the frequency/wavelength related to the size of the microvoids, cracks or grain boundaries in the Pd or Ni?

Robert Horst you are right when you said that frequency/wavelengh should be related with microvoids size etc..

Another point to take in accound is Pd layer's tickness but difficult to have an exact information from Mizuno.

Maybe JedRothwell could help us ? Mizuno seems to have said that only 10% of Pd layer covers Ni mesh , so in this case what should be the average tickness of Ni mesh ?

Quote from Alan Smith

In some of the heating-cooling curves Jed presented there appears to be a little period of self-sustain before the usual Newtonian cooling curve takes over. Zooming in on the duration of that might provide a clue as to the frequency with which the heater could be used to restart the LENR reaction.

I agree with this, except that analysing such things require a many body analysis of the thermal characteristics of the system - you get something that looks like a self-sustaining reaction for a while naturally from the thermal characteristics of the system when the temperature is measured some distance from the element generating power and being switched on and off.

Alan Smith if you consider a 1000x lower Pd mass both with a density rate 1.5x higher than Ni mesh, you will have a nickel layer so evenly distributed about 15 nm.

Now, if you heard Mizuno, he said that only 10% Ni mesh is cover by Pd.

So, you should find Pd islands of about 150 Nm in height even difficult to sputter uniformly.

if you sleep on a mattress put on the ground, thermal gradient from your body to the ground, will suck air moisture which will be deposited at ground face.

This is why we should understand that Pd/Ni interface lengh increase is an very important mizuno's trick to well "load NAE" even at very low pressure.

Quote from Alan Smith

Cydonia - If it helps, the mesh is woven from 52 micron wire. It Is never more then 2 wires thick- so the max thickness is 104 microns plus (maybe) a little more for the possibility of a physical gap between crossing strands.

Quote from Alan Smith

In some of the heating-cooling curves Jed presented there appears to be a little period of self-sustain before the usual Newtonian cooling curve takes over. Zooming in on the duration of that might provide a clue as to the frequency with which the heater could be used to restart the LENR reaction.

In the current state of minor knowledge about LENR parameters it is key to carefully watch all important process periods. The first heating/cooling are the two most important steps. Even a small difference in heating timing can spoil the reaction if you miss the sync point. Watching a running reaction usually brings no insight.

I remain convinced that heating (to trigger) appears as a secondary phenomenon, in fact it's what it implies that seems the most important.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

The anemometer traverses of the outlet of a 64 mm ID tube, 60 cm long, using a 65 mm OD axial fan were a little unusual (unexpected by me anyway).

Several times higher velocity was measured at the tube edges than in the middle. This is the opposite of what I was expecting. This may be an axial fan thing.

Thanks for picking up on this with ACTUAL measurements.

I've been doing some research on the fan issue ... (I am *NOT* an expert in fluid dynamics!!) .. but I've been tied up with other stuff (like backstage crew for a shakespeare production).

I'll post some results (and concerns) shortly.

Review of Mizuno's Air-Flow Calorimetry.

NOTE 1: I am *NOT* an expert
NOTE 2 : I am ONLY concerned with the fan (blower), not with the internals of the box or the conduction/convection/radiation from the walls of the box

This data is all in a google spreadsheet (which grew as I added stuff : it needs to be redone)
Google sheet : anyone can view

Links :

Papers :

M17/R19 https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTpreprintob.pdf Mizuno 2017 R19 Reactor

This is the Mizuno 2017 R19 reactor paper

M19/R20: https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTexcessheata.pdf Mizuno 2019 R20 Reactor
This is the Mizuno 2019 R20 reactor paper

Fan Laws :

FAN-LAWS https://www.axair-fans.co.uk/n…rstanding-basic-fan-laws/ Explanation of Fan Laws

A simple explanation of fan laws

ETB-FAL https://www.engineeringtoolbox…-affinity-laws-d_196.html Engineering Toolbox Fan Affinity Laws

ETB-FAL-TEMP https://www.engineeringtoolbox…e-fan-capacity-d_144.html Engineering Toolbox Fan-Law Temperature

Hot-wire anemometer concerns

HWA http://www.lth.se/fileadmin/ht…211/lab2b-pm-Eng-2009.pdf Hot Wire Anemometer Lab

HWA-MFG https://www.trutechtools.com/M…re-Anemometer_c_1001.html Hot Wire Anemometer Manufacturer Warning

Mizuno Volume-to-Power Curves and Formula

Mizuno presents a callibration plot of velocity vs fan power for each reactor
(I hand-digitized these from his diagrams)
He then uses a formula which fits a curve to these points
He gives the parameters for M17/R19 (used in a spreadsheet Jed posted)
I haven't seen the parameters for M19/R20 : Anonymous posted some which I used

Fan Law Summary

The VOLUME of air is proportional to the RPM of the fan
The POWER to produce a given volume is the CUBE of the RPM
(I inverted the formula to give the volume for a given power)

Chart 1 : M17/R19

The round,black circles are Mizuno's callibration points.
The blue stars are from Mizuno's curve. But note that it is asymptotic to 4
The green triangles are "Fan Law" results, based on Mizuno's top-right point
(The fit is good down to 1 W / 2 m/sec)

Chart 2 : Temperature-dependence

Mizuno reported an ambient temperature of 20C and a maximum operational temperature of 60C
The velocity (and hence volume) varies with temperature (as does the density and specific heat).

The results here are for the fan-law values at 20C, 40C and 60C

Chart 2



I cannot see a temperature calculation in the M17/R19 spreadsheet. They should be included.
NOTE: Mizunos formula will UNDER-estimate the volume at higher temperatures.

Now on to the M19/R20 results

Chart 3 : Mizuno M19/R20 callibration vs M17/R19 formula



Mizuno says that the M19/R20 reactor was usually operated at 6.5 watts, but the callibration is only done up to 5.5 W

Chart 4 : Anonymous provided a fit to the M19/R20 reactor, and I used Fan-law from the top-right point



The curve for the formula FITS the results, but this fan does not seem to follow the FAN LAW. Why not?

Hot-Wire Anemometer

The fan/blower system is far into the area of turbulent flow.

The lab notes http://www.lth.se/fileadmin/ht…211/lab2b-pm-Eng-2009.pdf clearly say :

As a general rule-of-thumb, conventional hot wire anemometry should not be used if the local turbulence intensity is higher than about 35%, at least not for quantitative purposes. Apart from the mix-up of velocity components (cross-talk), it is evident that a hot wire can not distinguish between what is forward and backward, it behaves like a rectifier.

(Remember Defkalion's flow meter?)

One manufacturer also has a "turbulent flow" warning.

Can you give me the M19/R20 curve values from the spreadsheet? (One cell will suffice)

Do we have the EXACT model (and nominal specs RPM/Watts/Volume) used in M19/R20?

Quote from JedRothwell

I do not know what you mean by this. What curve? The blower calibration is Fig. 4.

The values used in his formula A*exp(Wb/w)+B for M19/R20

Quote from Alan Fletcher

NOTE 1: I am *NOT* an expert

Quote from Alan Fletcher

The fan/blower system is far into the area of turbulent flow.

Have you verified that the hotwire anemometer is not recommended for turbulent systems.?

You need to show calculation of why not rather than a ROT.. based on turbulent intensity.

What do you recommend... a pitot tube?

Wkiipedia

""Hot-wire anemometers, while extremely delicate, have extremely high frequency-response and fine spatial resolution compared to other measurement methods, and as such are almost universally employed for the detailed study of turbulent flows, or any flow in which rapid velocity fluctuations are of interest.""

Thanks : https://www.sanyodenki.com/arc…_pdf/San_Ace_97BM33_E.pdf

109BM12GC2-01
Max 12V 0.6A 3800 RPM 0.82 m^3/min
(Velocity will be from that volume & area of the tube)

Hmm... that model has a PULSE SENSOR ... maybe measure the RPM, so the output is linear with RPM (rather than cube-root of watts?)