MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

  • Quote

    Anyway, sooner or later I hope he will get around to testing this thing in a large calorimeter.

    JedRothwell Geez Louise, he doesn't have to do that! With the power ratio he claims, all he has to do is stick a heat flow transducer on the exterior of his large reactor. Two HFT's if he wants to go deluxe. Any small non-uniformity in the heat flux through the casing won't matter compared to the claimed power gain. A control run would be the same thing, same heater power, just mesh with no Pd as Alan Smith astutely suggested. Relatively low cost. The only issue is getting an HFT with the right sensitivity and operating temperature range. Any of the manufacturers of those things could help with that. I bet it'd be less than $1K and would give a resoundingly positive answer if the claim is even close to correct.

  • One additional possible artifact characteristic of Mizuno-style air calorimeters (if constructed according to his geometry) and easily avoided by replicators.


    That is an imaginary possible artifact, that -- if it were real -- would be ~7 orders of magnitude too small to cause the effect, and about 5 orders of magnitude too small to measure. It is not possible to construct a calorimeter that avoids all of the imaginary problems THH comes up with, because he can come up with as many more as he wants. Most are physically impossible. How can you avoid invisible drops of water that defy gravity and magically erase the energy need to vaporize water? That's like trying to protect against poltergeists.


    I recommend people read a good textbook on calorimetry and learn to avoid actual problems, not imaginary ones.

  • Quote

    How many of these experiments have you done?

    Try to curb your unpleasantness. Write me an email: [email protected] (alert me here please if you do) and I will refer you to one of my papers on this issue.


    oldguy I think those would work. The usual problem with using these as heat meters (and it has been done) is that they are thick and have a high thermal resistance which tends to distort the temperature distribution and the heat flux where you place them. In this instance, I would need to have someone compute it from the specs but I suspect that the heat flow would be so large compared to the control that the thermal resistance of the device would be no issue. Normally, heat meters/heat flow transducers are made as thin and thermally conductive as possible, compatible with adequate sensitivity. But in this case, I doubt it matters. One has the luxury of accurate blanks and calibrations here which overrides some clumsiness in making the measurement.


    ETA to oldguy : I was thinking something more like this:

    https://www.fluxteq.com/hthfs-…rature-heat-flux-sensor-1

    https://www.fluxteq.com/products


    heat-flow-transducer.jpg


    -many companies make these. The whole experiment would take a day or two actually running, maybe a week or less total -- if the reactor was ready to fire up and depending on how long it would take to replace the active mesh with an inactive one and pump everything down again for the control run. Total cost probably $1000 or less. Hell, if he wants to do it, I'll send him the money (via Rothwell I would assume) myself. I'm getting impatient because the claims are so good and while I know people are preparing to replicate, nobody has said they are repeating it carefully and with a fresh view with Mizuno.


    Everyone seems to overlook that if it turns out Mizuno is, respectfully, FOS, then there isn't much point in going to the trouble and expense of replication.

  • What do you recommend?


    Jed here is right that with R20 results, and even R19 results, minutiae of calorimetry are not the most important things.


    Most important:

    (1) keep an exact dated contemporaneous logbook

    (2) document what is done. E.g. where there are multiple reactor designs, or multiple physical reactors, document precisely which one is used in any experiment

    (3) document precisely all experimental setups, equipment used, how are measurements made, etc (photos are a quick way to do this).

    (4) collect calibration results (always) contemporaneously with real results (ABAB etc)

    (5) keep time-stamped raw results (both active and cal)


    For example, Mizuno's R20 result would be much stronger if we had 3,4,5.


    It does not actually cost more, nor take much more time, to do this. It does require an organised approach to the experimental work, without which results are much less valuable.


    In fact it can actually save time because when things are weird all these details can be used to understand why.


    Note that I have segued this back (roughly) on topic.

  • The Cartridge heater I am looking at says:

    Cartridge heaters have low/moderate watt density elements consisting of helical wire coils on ceramic former or high watt density elements with the heating element located close to the sheath, which is swaged to improve heat conduction.

    Is it okay to have a helical wire coil or does that confuse things?

  • My two cents Dartin: helical or folded or serpentine all heat the reactor interior similarly.


    I remain unconcerned with sheath heater format.


    Mizuno used external tape heating and various other internal heaters. Or so I believe having inspected images thus far available.

  • Mizuno specifies that the evacuation must be down to 1X10-2 Pa which is about 1X10-4 Torr. This two stage pump can do that:

    The Alcatel 2012A vacuum pump has a pumping speed of 11 CFM and an ultimate pressure of 1X10-4 Torr. Alcatel 2012A , Vacuum Pump Dual Stage.


    Would that be adequate for this replication?


    If not, why not...

  • On the topic of vacuums and reacvtors my colleague Russ has pointed out to me that Mizuno's reactor has been 'seasoned' over many years, many long periods of bake-out and high vacuum etc. A newly built reactor might well be difficult to get to this state of purity in a hurry.

  • On the topic of vacuums and reacvtors my colleague Russ has pointed out to me that Mizuno's reactor has been 'seasoned' over many years, many long periods of bake-out and high vacuum etc.


    That is incorrect. Most are fabricated not long before first use. He has made 20, I believe, R1 through R20. (R = Reactor) (I think he did not use a few of them.) He does not use the same one for years, except for the first cruciform one shown on p. 8 here, which ran for 3 years as noted:


    https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTexcessheat.pdf


    I do not know why he made so many reactors, but I am sure he has his reasons.


    He himself did not fabricate them. An expert machine shop that makes them. They clean them and deliver them in a very clean state, he says. I do not know what they do, but I suppose they test for leaks and they bake them out.

  • That is incorrect. Most are fabricated not long before first use. He has made 20, I believe, R1 through R20. (R = Reactor) (I think he did not use a few of them.) He does not use the same one for years, except for the first cruciform one


    Well, thats good to know. Standard practice is to polish all the welds and then pickle such fabrications in (most recently) strong and hot citric acid, rinse them off with DI water and check for leaks at the designed operating temperature. I guess being Japanese his fabricators might take a step or two more.

  • A couple of more recent books on calorimetry:


    https://www.amazon.com/Calorim…hias-Sarge/dp/3527327614/


    https://www.amazon.com/Princip…y-Gaisford/dp/1782620516/


    But calorimetry is a very diverse field. There are many specialized types of calorimeters and you do not need to learn about them all. Depending on which type you are interested in, a technical article/paper may be better than a book. So is personal contact with an expert when you are ready to get to work.

  • Could you share references ? For me this type of heater could have an external layer in magnesium oxide which have a large IR spectrum.

    Important finding or not , who knows ?

    The Cartridge heater I am looking at says:

    Cartridge heaters have low/moderate watt density elements consisting of helical wire coils on ceramic former or high watt density elements with the heating element located close to the sheath, which is swaged to improve heat conduction.

    Is it okay to have a helical wire coil or does that confuse things?

  • Could you share references ? For me this type of heater could have an external layer in magnesium oxide which have a large IR spectrum.

    Important finding or not , who knows ?


    No- the Mizuno heaters are sold as 'flexible' with quite a small bend radius. To me that suggests that they are in an inconel or similar metal sheath.