MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

  • The significancy of the pressure change concurrent with the gamma is indeed a very good sign that you are having a LENR reaction. Celani constantan wire was thoroughly verified by the MFMP to produce 11 to 15% excess heat but the gamma burst was a sure sign that the run was going to be succesfull.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Betelgeuse

  • Here is a hi-res photo of Saito's calorimeter.


    Great photo.


    A few quick notes:


    1) No turbo pump, just what appears to be (if my memory serves me) a rotory vane type pump. This limits the vacuum to what that type of pump can put out.


    2) I don't see the H2/D2 tank supply apparatus. It must have been removed.


    3) Input valve is at the perfect place if it is valved to off, thereby limiting potential resupply of chemical fuel to what is already in the unit.


    4) The input gas tube diameter is really small and really long , so I doubt that the effective conduction of the tube is significant to the calorimetry.


    5) With the bricks under the reactor and the nice air gap between the reactor and the walls, I doubt too much reactor heat is going out by conduction to the bricks and thus the outside or anywhere else. It looks like certainly most heat is leaving via air convection or radiation to the walls.


    6) Assume this is the same reactor body (i.e. conflat) I think the calibration run would be consistent after changing either the gas or the reactor mesh. Q. Change the gas and how does the heat flow change? A. I think it doesn't change enough to allow for the 30% excess heat that Saito thinks he is seeing.

  • The cylindrical devices of Mizuno’s (50 cm long) are clearly longer than the cruciform reactors, so the Saito calorimeter box appears to have the same external dimensions as Mizuno’s calorimeter box. I estimate the cruciform reactor to be about 40 cm long, consistent with the description in the 2018 ICCF power point presentation (page 5).

  • When did the power go off? At 15:35? It does not drop quite in accordance with Newton's law of cooling.


    The only thing you can do is to compare the curve with a calibration cool down curve.


    Calibration curves are the most important thing if you do not have a calorimeter. But you must do calibration under the very same (as close as possible) conditions where as one is to heat the full system to the exact same temperature for quit a reasonable duration.


    You will never see a perfect Newton's cool down curve as the reactor is not behaving like an uniform/homogenous Ohm's resistor. Nickel alloys and also the reactor steel undergoes some minor phase changes. Even the NiH connections do change depending on temperature. This is also the reason to have multiple internal TC's to be able to better correlated what caused the plateau, stronger sink etc...

  • The only thing you can do is to compare the curve with a calibration cool down curve. . . .


    You will never see a perfect Newton's cool down curve as the reactor is not behaving like an uniform/homogenous Ohm's resistor.

    Good points.


    So, I gather you will post a calibration cool down close to these conditions. I look forward to that.

  • Another power off temp curve.


    The cooling curve you show is qualitatively exactly what should be expected from a simple temperature-sensitive energy release mechanism such as is claimed for LENR. Here is comparable cooling in a mathematical simulation of such behaviour. You should ignore the time and temperature units because I have not set the parameters of the model to mimic your situation...


  • Desireless


    Three qualitative predictions for a reactor equipped with a temperature-dependent energy release mechanism (such as sometimes claimed for LENR).


    1) The cooling curve should have a plateau or inflection point

    2) There should be a corresponding inflection point in the heating curve but at a lower temperature

    3) The temperature should show hysteresis with respect to the input heater power. This means that If you start at room temperature and increase the input power in steps, the steady-state temperatures you reach should be quite different from those attained if you start from a high temperature (where excess heating is fully engaged) and decrease the input power in steps. There should be a fairly broad range of inputs where this bistability is obvious. An LENR-inactive control should not show hysteresis..

  • Now I have to focus at the Palladium deposition method. Mizuno is saying more is better.

    I am extremely eager to see SEM and EDX data from his Mesh. Then it will be enough to reach to the same condition.


    Then there is another aspect for thinking. Why new design of the reactor improved COP so dramatically? Mizuno revealed that basically his previous reactors had similar Mesh but COP was not higher than 2. I think that it is important how electrons are flowing inside.

    Temperature and polarity difference has an impact on the electrons. Moreover low pressure helps the flow.


    Is it possible Mizuno would like to perform experiment in which he will set polarity of the SS shell to the same voltage as of the heater? Will it reduce power output?


    In theory my reactor will allow to feed voltage between central tube which contain heater and the outer shell. I have to only add non conductive washers.

    Lets see if COP can be improved.

  • Well, all good if you are focused, but come on, taking a picture to share with us won’t take long. In less time that Took to write two lines of this message in my phone I took a picture of my little Lulú kitty to share with all of you. (And in case you are wondering, yes, I am at the Loo, she loves to make me company on these solemn moments 🤣)

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.