Please help me understand/confirm:
1) I am assuming that the power outputs in the new MizunoTsupplement.pdf were generated using the same airflow calorimetry techniques as the earlier Mizuno papers? Is this correct?
2) Calibration in figure 3, page 7 is in 'arbitrary units'. What's the conversion from arbitrary units for "Air In" an "air out" to temperature in degrees C, i.e. how high a rise are we seeing?
3) Are there photos available in the as tested configuration (including surface polish to know emissivity and surface area are both about the same) of the the control unit vs the active unit? Is the placement of the heater unit within the control vs. active reactor unit the same. Or is is actually the same reactor unit with different gas or metal mesh? Do they have the same gas at the same pressure/vacuum inside the unit during the test, or is one running for example presumed to be inert nitrogen or helium, while the other runs hydrogen (with different conductivities)?
4) Why is the input air hotter for the first 10000 or so seconds?
5) I am assuming the airflow is the same for control vs active run. Is that correct.
6) Do we have available the raw input and output air temperature of the control run and the active run. I agree entirely with Jed's earlier statement (6 months back) that a significant rise in the output temperature (i.e. more than X degrees) running a similar reactor with same interior gas and the same airflow almost certainly has to be excess heat. So for example the 345 watt calibration run may have output temperature of around 200C while the active run having output of around 250C or above would be difficult to explain as anything other than significant excess heat. This lets us on the outside confirm the reasonableness of the calibration calculation.
If all other things being equal the reactor gets a LOT hotter, it _is_ excess heat. +50C on 200C is a LOT hotter. +75C more so. Such a signal can more than compensate for the "noise" of variation in reactor emissivity or internal gas conduction. We can leave the details to the excess power calibration for later, but at least focus now on the Mizuno type rig being a working and repeatable large excess heat producing unit. This supplement at 350 and 500 watts input looks like about COP 1.4 unit. Assuming the non-airflow captured heat can be used to heat the room, it's a 40% more efficient space heater! That's an economic start. (With better insulation around the walls and high temperature materials, input power can be reduced while lowering the airflow to maintain same reactor temperature, and thus COP can be improved.)
Thank you Jed. These are encouraging results.