Thank you for the answer.
PS - Could you, please, check the units on the time scale and, just in case, correct the graph?
Thank you for the answer.
PS - Could you, please, check the units on the time scale and, just in case, correct the graph?
A more interesting thing is that red trace continues to slowly rise, when the grey line is (Looks) flat (steady state) between 15 and 19 ks. This effect is especially noticeable in the 2017 paper, where the greater the output the less steady state the anomalous output is, at the end of the input power period, but the (Corrected) calibration traces become flat (steady state) fairly quickly and stay that way for a long time.
The equation for the temperature is pretty complicated:
(Tout − Tin)/deg = ((In) + (Jn)) × 0.5 − (HN) − (−0.302 × exp (− (On)/1.829)) − 0.376+ (Mn)
Maybe there is a different version of the temperature calculation for the gray line?
I am surprised that the expression for Tout - Tin is so complicated.
The first part, ((In) + (Jn)) × 0.5, looks like the average of the 2 thermocouple temperatures from the calorimeter outlet. That is just as expected. The second part, (HN), looks as though it could be the thermocouple reading from the inlet. Also straightforward and expected. So I would have thought that already we have the expression for Tout - Tin. But it is not yet complete, there is more. Added to the foregoing is a term that declines exponentially with what looks like some measured quantity On, and subtracted away is a measured term Mn. Finally, there is an added constant 0.376. This is the right size for a term compensating for the heat that a blower operating at 6.5W adds to the air in the calorimeter, but the sign seems wrong. If you want to come up with an expression for the temperature gain due just to the reactor, then I thinkyou should be taking the difference between the outlet and inlet thermocouples, ((In) + (Jn)) × 0.5 − (HN), and subtracting 0.376, not adding it.
Complicated, as you say. For dimensional consistency I think that On and Mn must have units of degrees C. Do you know what they are?
A more interesting thing is that red trace continues to slowly rise, when the grey line is (Looks) flat (steady state) between 15 and 19 ks.
It seems to me to be rising in this region
Dr Mizuno's recent clarifications fail to address the issue of the crossing grey and red lines in one of his plots. I am glad to see, however, the arrival of new data that do not have this flaw.
After the new graph, the crossing lines in the old one could be explained by the smoothing of the red line in the former graph. Apart the strange peak at the beginning of the first one, the two red lines are compatible each other assuming that the former is an average of the latter performed by using a mobile window of a few minutes extending entirely on the left of the current time.
A more interesting thing is that red trace continues to slowly rise, when the grey line is (Looks) flat (steady state) between 15 and 19 ks. This effect is especially noticeable in the 2017 paper, where the greater the output the less steady state the anomalous output is, at the end of the input power period, but the (Corrected) calibration traces become flat (steady state) fairly quickly and stay that way for a long time.
Presumably the red trace continues to rise because the correction factor depends upon one or more T values which continue to change during the experiment.
Some more words from the cook would easily clarify this point.
Up date replicator Desireless.
Testing the system at 200W. Behavior become more nonlinear. It is more apparent how pressure is changing excess heat. Higher pressure = lower excess heat which mean lower internal and external temperature. Only 10 mbar difference will cause tremendous difference.
I use 900W twintex DC power supply.
Will Do Alan.
After the new graph, the crossing lines in the old one could be explained by the smoothing of the red line in the former graph. Apart the strange peak at the beginning of the first one, the two red lines are compatible each other assuming that the former is an average of the latter performed by using a mobile window of a few minutes extending entirely on the left of the current time.
I think that the most recent plot posted by Dr. Mizuno (the one labelled 20200702 near the bottom left) represents a different than the one with the crossing red and grey traces. The input power seems to decline less in the new plot than in the old one.
In any case, I am reassured when Mizuno says "The value after calibration is always large.". I think he means that the corrected output power should always be larger than the uncorrected power at all points ... which is what I have been saying. In light of this, I think that the crossing of the traces must be some sort of one time weirdness ... as Jed argued.
Are the formulas you posted giving the corrected output power and temperature difference the ones used for calculations in the 2019 papers you published with Mizuno?
To learn a WHOLE LOT about air flow calorimetry, see this paper in the latest volume of the JCMNS:
Ruer, J., Basics of Air-Flow Calorimetry. J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci., 2020. 33: p. 252-267.
https://www.lenr-canr.org/acro…jcondensedzf.pdf#page=258
Are the formulas you posted giving the corrected output power and temperature difference the ones used for calculations in the 2019 papers you published with Mizuno?
They are from a book:
https://www.elsevier.com/books…/gromov/978-0-12-815944-6
I think they are the same.
I think they are the same.
In the expression for the difference between inlet and outlet temperatures,
(Tout − Tin)/deg = ((In) + (Jn)) × 0.5 − (HN) − (−0.302 × exp (− (On)/1.829)) − 0.376+ (Mn)
... what are the inputs on the right hand side? In particular, what do On and Mn represent?
Edit: Oh I see. I can answer my own question. On is input power for the blower and Mn is a the ambient temperature of the lab. Congratulations on the book chapter by the way.
MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/posts/after-upgrading-the-magic-sound-mizuno-cell-and-plumbing-alan-goldwater
Magicsound's streaming experiment is occasionally accompanied by music. Great music! Reminds me of a 1970's FM station.
Section 3 of MR3 Cal3 is now running: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzZGQE00I5o
The power steps will be 100, 120, 140, 160 watts.
Found this independent paper from a Swede lab, that performed EDS analysis to Ni Meshes, Apparently provided by Mizuno, from the same batch that was used in the recipe paper. AFAIK it has not been posted here before, correct me if I am wrong.
https://www.neofire.com/neofir…Bjorkbom_Neofire_2019.pdf
It can serve as a baseline to compare with the prepared meshes.
The authos of this study, Peter Bjorkbom is as you see a forum member. Let's hope he joins the thread.
QuoteUpdate 2020-02-15
NEOFIRE™ is per february 2020 working on compiling reports of intense lab analysis work performed during final quarter of 2019 on Mizuno type materials and reaction products. The results and reports will be published here https://www.neofire.com/papers. Stay tuned.
I do like the sound of that.
I gave some samples of the Mizuno mesh (provided by Jed) to Peter at ICCF22. His nice analysis adds additional detail to my initial assessment from August 2019.