MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    Quote from dartin

    The basic Reactor Vessel is constructed as follows:

    Take a piece of 24” Stainless Steel tubing with a 4” diameter and place two Bored Conflat Flanges, CF 6”, Bored 4”, tapped holes. Weld them in place.

    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 deionized water and check for leaks at the designed operating temperature.


    Source of 24" x 4" stainless steel pipe:

    pipingnow.com/4-Seamless-pipe-schedule-10s-stainless-steel-304-304l-astm-a312-asme-sa312/


    Why 304 stainless instead of 316? Does it matter? What did Mizuno use?


    Suggest you try it unless you have funds for the turbopump. Price is right compared to turbopump + backer pump setup. If two stage Alcatel gets you to the 10^-4 Torr level, it does. If not, you can trade it in or use it for a backer pump. If you don't replicate, perhaps because of insufficient vacuum, you can re-evaluate at the time to decide if you want to pay for the more expensive equipment. By then other replicators should be getting results.

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    The argument that point temperature measurements are a lousy way to estimate heat flow still remains for many reasons. This has always been my objection to isoperibolic calorimeters which in a sense are not calorimeters at all. Here comes Jed ... yes, I know they've been around since Archimedes.


    I do not know about Archimedes. J. P. Joule invented the modern version. However, while the problem you cite is real, EVERYONE KNOWS ABOUT IT. Everyone who uses that kind of calorimeter does not measure at a single point, and they make sure they get a correctly averaged temperature that is accurate for the entire cell. They always discuss this in the papers. They always tell the reader how and why they are sure the temperature is averaged. There are many different methods. F&P used an array of sensors, and they made sure the electrolyte was well mixed with various tests. Miles put a copper sleeve around the cell and measured externally at several points in the copper. Copper conducts heat well, so the temperature was uniform, but he made sure it was.


    In contrast to this, putting a single thermocouple on Mizuno's cell will definitely give you the wrong answer. He said that. He showed that in the figure we added to the Supplement. That's why we added it -- to send that message. This is the wrong approach. I have stated here several times, you cannot use the cell temperature to do calorimetery. On the other hand, you can use it to confirm there is excess heat. During a 50 W calibration it is ~30 deg C. During a 50 W input excess heat run it is ~350 deg C. That's a big difference. That cannot be a mistake. That definitely indicates excess heat. But you cannot use that number to estimate how much heat there is, except within a broad range. It gives a large overestimate.

    Quote

    During a 50 W input excess heat run it is ~350 deg C. That's a big difference. That cannot be a mistake.

    Have to agree with that. Of course, I wonder what the temperature difference between control and active is on the large reactor.


    Quote

    That definitely indicates excess heat.

    Yes. If the control run is really a valid blank. And if everything except the activity of the reactor is identical, comparing the two runs. For example, no situation where there are spikey waveforms present on heaters during the active run but not during the control. I doubt that Mizuno has that situation but IIRC, some other claimants to LENR did or possibly still do.


    Quote

    But you cannot use that number to estimate how much heat there is, except within a broad range. It gives a large overestimate

    If it's difficult to calculate, why not calibrate? Unless it's wildly unstable. And even then, you could average. I'm sure that wouldn't be hard in LabVIEW.


    I have also been in contact with vacuum vessel manufacturers. Rather than weld the CF flanges to the tubing myself, I have asked for quotes (from 3 manufacturers) for the finished assembly (generally known as a "nipple") plus the supply of the end plates and copper seals. None of the manufacturers match the OD of the tubing stated in Jed's doc as 114mm. Building high vacuum bits is a specialty work. Just because I can TIG weld doesn't mean I can make a suitable reactor (although I might try sometime). My concern is that the dimensions don't work out to agree with the doc. So, are we going to get clear and exact details of Mizuno's work to replicate, or are we all going to try something similar?


    skip

    Inconel will have a much higher total emissivity than SS so a better IR target, but it will run cooler than the SS at the same watts in. I wonder if the reactor could be sleeved on the outside to adjust the emissivity of the surface but not physically affect the interior of the cell.

    Maybe there is a nice flat E=0.5 in Hot Rod Red.

    • Official Post
    Quote from anonymous

    Why 304 stainless instead of 316? Does it matter? What did Mizuno use?


    316 has better corrosion resistance because of added manganese, otherwise much the same as 304 - formerly known as 18/8. I doubt it is a critical issue.



    eta:- 300 Series—austenitic chromium-nickel alloys


    Type 301—highly ductile, for formed products. Also hardens rapidly during mechanical working. Good weldability. Better wear resistance and fatigue strength than 304.

    Type 302—same corrosion resistance as 304, with slightly higher strength due to added carbon.

    Type 303—free machining version of 304 via addition of sulfur and phosphorus. Also referred to as "A1" in accordance with ISO 3506.

    Type 304—the most common grade; the classic 18/8 (18% chromium, 8% nickel) stainless steel. Outside of the US it is commonly known as "A2 stainless steel", in accordance with ISO 3506 (not to be confused with A2 tool steel).

    Type 316—the second most common grade (after 304); for food and surgical stainless steel uses; alloy addition of molybdenum prevents specific forms of corrosion. It is also known as marine grade stainless steel due to its increased resistance to chloride corrosion compared to type 304. 316 is often used for building nuclear reprocessing plants.

    Density:


    if you reckon the only way that the heater affects this reaction is temperature, then you can get the same results from smaller input by having lower heat loss from reactor. Why is this good? Because higher COP is a good idea (other than that it might go unstable). So, for example, for same internals, two layers of insulation instead of one, together with halving the airflow, would halve (roughly) heat loss and therefore allow same temperature - and therefore excess heat signal - for half of the heat in.


    So I'd suggest that if you think you are getting say +10W from a 200W input, just drop to 10W input and insulate much better.


    Try with higher airflow first just in case you are getting high temperature-dependent heat output (which would be unstable with lower airflow).


    ------------------------


    The key issue with this diff cal is that the thermal resistance from each reactor must be the same. That includes radiation and forced convection (if following M). Forced convection can be made similar by exact symmetry. Important to have air gaps relatively large so that tolerances do not vary them by much creating errors in airflow. Radiation depends on emissivity of reactor and the inner surface of the insulation. Make sure this is all the same. Check that the base everywhere has same thermal properties - a large thick block of insulation would do. Check that identical insulation is used everywhere and that the insulation is positioned pushed carefully up to the box so it does not differently block airflow for the two reactors.


    THH

    Having read the Mizuno papers in detail I think the heater might be a critical component.

    • The largest known difference between R19 and R20 is the change of heater position and possibly the heater type
    • It seems to me if simple heat was the only requirement to drive the reaction, it would be a self-sustaining, positive feedback loop. It's not, which suggest, and I've seen other suggest this, that it may be IR radiation driven, maybe frequency specific.

    We do not know the truth of this theory, but it seems plausible. And for both those reasons, and in order to do as close a replication as possible and to reduce the variables as much as possible, I think it's important we know as much as we can about the heater. How exactly did he fit the 2m long heater element into the much shorter chamber? Would it be possible to obtain a photo even? I think this would be good additional info for your supplementary paper Jed to fill in one of the few small gaps in the description of the experiment.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Riom

    Having read the Mizuno papers in detail I think the heater might be a critical component.

    • The largest known difference between R19 and R20 is the change of heater position and possibly the heater type
    • It seems to me if simple heat was the only requirement to drive the reaction, it would be a self-sustaining, positive feedback loop. It's not, which suggest, and I've seen other suggest this, that it may be IR radiation driven, maybe frequency specific.

    We do not know the truth of this theory, but it seems plausible. And for both those reasons, and in order to do as close a replication as possible and to reduce the variables as much as possible, I think it's important we know as much as we can about the heater. How exactly did he fit the 2m long heater element into the much shorter chamber? Would it be possible to obtain a photo even? I think this would be good additional info for your supplementary paper Jed to fill in one of the few small gaps in the description of the experiment.

    This is why I mentioned in a prior comment that we need to know and If possible adcquire the same exact heater. Unfortunately the Japanese vendor does not specify much about it specially with regards of the material of what is made in order to seek something similar elsewhere.


    With all due respect; I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this...


    Am I correct that you are referring to this paper?

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

    If so, you are referring to an entirely different reactor design. I suspect this 2017 reactor wasn't melted down and R20 made from the melt.

    Therefore without it being specifically mentioned by TM, the grade of SS is a guess or an assumption.


    Am I being too picky? Is the term "replication" some loosey goosey approximation of an original?

    "shouldn't make a difference" is not a phrase I would consider part of a replication plan


    I suspect (but don't know) TM used a speciality vacuum manufacturer, probably international, to make the R20. Unless he has a brother in law in the welding biz, it would likely be cheaper (TM is price sensitive). If so, he probably bought a close to off the shelf assembly, or he sent a set of drawings and specs to a manufacturer/welder.


    skip

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.