So where are we on the next MFMP R20 replication attempt? Bob/Alan G. received 5 treated (activated) meshes, and used 3 already. Is 2 enough for the follow-up run, and if so, when might that happen?
MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY
-
-
-
2 should be enough, however they can receive another within 3 days if needed.
-
2 should be enough, however they can receive another within 3 days if needed.
If these things cost you a lot of money, I will pay for them.
-
Thank you very much for the offer. We can pay costs for another few pieces to MFMP now. However in such small quantity production is costy - around 150 USD for one mesh. Yet when needed more in a bigger quantity price can be few times lower.
We already have over 1000pcs of untreated meshes in stock - these are very cheap.
We can ship worldwide with 1-4 day delivery time to any replicator. There is extreme benefit that all these meshes are identical (including activated ones)
I believe once replicated by one or more groups it can enable live demonstration to anyone in the world.
-
Thank you very much for the offer. We can pay costs for another few pieces to MFMP now. However in such small quantity production is costy - around 150 USD for one mesh. Yet when needed more in a bigger quantity price can be few times lower.
Let me coordinate with MFMP to pay for 10 of them, $1,500. They are set up for contributions. They have your address and so on, so they can send you the money.
-
That is very nice from you. If MFMP will agree with it, we will start production of another 10 meshes. They can be ready in around one week.
-
That is very nice from you. If MFMP will agree with it, we will start production of another 10 meshes.
That is for you and MFMP to decide. My $1,500 contribution is to pay for the ones you have already shipped. If you and MFPM decide they need 10 more, contact me for another contribution.
-
-
Yes, my email can be used. Thank you
-
A quick update: de-loading the mesh from MR5.1 was partially successful. After several hours at 6E-5 Pa, 260°C the cell was allowed to cool, and ~80 Pa D2 was added. The pressure dropped to 17 Pa within a few minutes, showing absorption had been partially restored. Subsequent heating to 260°C showed no deviation from the thermal calibration values.
I've given some thought to the points raised by me356, and what was learned from MR5.1. Specifically, running the cell at the recommended lower pressure, with the observed fast and deep absorption of D2 makes the thermal calibration of the system far more complex, as convective heat transfer through the gas goes to zero. So I'll be spending some time exploring what is now a three-parameter calibration space, before attempting further tests with the remaining two prepared meshes.
-
Thank you for the details magicsound !
In the meantime we are preparing scaled up reactor that will have an active compensation for load.
This will allow it to be in thermal contact with almost any fluid and mitigate the issue of variable COP.
In other words allowing to reach the highest COP during different load. This will be achieved by balancing temperature of the inner core and external surface independently and automatically.
The reactor will be prepared to comfortable run 1 - 50 meshes and sense temperature at 11 places. Total electrical output power is up to 10kW.
I will share photos of the beast likely shortly after new year. The weight is roughly 30kg.
Later we wish to ship it to MFMP and other party that can indendependently confirm the results.
Our other team is working on preparing meshes with no Pd to allow a mass production. If there will be a success, it will change everything. Tests might be finished on january. Few months ago I thought it is impossible to produce it.
The Nickel mesh will have surface area few orders bigger, the processing is very different and more complex. I dont know results yet, so there is chance it could fail. However with the new reactor performance will be higher in any case.
-
The reactor will be prepared to comfortable run 1 - 50 meshes and sense temperature at 11 places. Total electrical output power is up to 10kW.
Do you mean electrical input power?
I think that is too large. It might be dangerous. I suggest you make a much smaller reactor first, with 1 kW input or less.
-
me356 Wow, that mesh looks gnarly, as we say here in Surf City. I understand where you're going with the new reactor design. Better thermal coupling makes tight control possible, and more TCs always helps understanding a complex system. Don't neglect the need for calibration in your design process. I was told by someone "skilled in the art" Argon is not good choice for inactive calibration, and dry Nitrogen is better for that. See the graph below for thermal conductivity of gases at low pressure.
-
Do you mean electrical input power?
I think that is too large. It might be dangerous. I suggest you make a much smaller reactor first, with 1 kW input or less.
This is what we have now for testing the meshes (2kW heater). But it can`t run during different loads.
The new reactor can operate at 100W as well.
Yes, electrical input that can be converted to heat.
We are doing calibration always with Deuterium for this reactor.
-
In the meantime we are preparing scaled up reactor that will have an active compensation for load.
This will allow it to be in thermal contact with almost any fluid and mitigate the issue of variable COP.
In other words allowing to reach the highest COP during different load. This will be achieved by balancing temperature of the inner core and external surface independently and automatically.
I am trying to understand what you mean here. Does it mean that you circulate cooling fluids through the core and over the surface in order to withdraw heat?
-
I've given some thought to the points raised by me356, and what was learned from MR5.1. Specifically, running the cell at the recommended lower pressure, with the observed fast and deep absorption of D2 makes the thermal calibration of the system far more complex, as convective heat transfer through the gas goes to zero. So I'll be spending some time exploring what is now a three-parameter calibration space, before attempting further tests with the remaining two prepared meshes.
I would have thought that thermal calibration would have become slightly simpler, not more complex. From viewing your videos I believe that the rolled up mesh is pressed up against the metal wall of the reactor, thus forming a conductive pathway for thermal energy from the reactor exterior into the mesh. Other heat-transfer pathways from the exterior into active locations in the mesh would include radiative transfer, heat conduction through the gas, and convection. Given low internal pressures, I would have thought that gas conduction and convection would become almost negligible in comparison with conduction through the mesh and radiative transfer. And (although I don't have a really solid feel for this) my first guess is that radiative transfer would be weak in comparison with mesh conduction at the temperatures you are working with. So I would expect a simpler approach to thermal equilibrium (because fewer important pathways for transfer) and therefore an easier calibration. Perhaps I'm wrong.
One other thought ... if low pressure is really an obstacle, is it reasonable to dilute the D2 in some other gas so that you have a total pressure that allows for an appropriate level of heat conduction but still sustains a low partial pressure of D2?
-
@Bruce_H Heat conduction between the mesh and the reactor shell isn't well-controlled, because the mesh isn't very flat or rigid, and is 3-6 layers after rolling it up.
Regarding internal vs external heat, advice from both Mizuno and me356 is that the reaction is much more likely with internal heating. It's possible that IR irradiation is an important trigger, as well as a thermal gradient and the resulting gas flux through the mesh. I did try internal heat with a cartridge in the thermowell, but it wasn't capable of reaching the temperature needed due to the thin wall of the tubing. So a new cell end flange with power feed-throughs and internal heater coil is the plan. Just not this week....
-
Regarding internal vs external heat, advice from both Mizuno and me356 is that the reaction is much more likely with internal heating. It's possible that IR irradiation is an important trigger, as well as a thermal gradient and the resulting gas flux through the mesh.
This is somewhat at odds with Daniel_G's reports of working with Mizuno meshes over the past year. He claims better, more reliable results with what he calls an incubator heater ... basically a big highly insulated convection oven with the heating coil sitting beside the reactor rather than wrapped around it. This would appear to exclude IR irradiation, magnetic fields, steep thermal gradients, etc. as necessary for ignition.
-
This is somewhat at odds with Daniel_G's reports of working with Mizuno meshes over the past year.
Daniel hasn't offered to collaborate or share materials, designs, or data - other than his sparse description of the "furnace". If he wants to contribute to this discussion, I for one would welcome it and he knows where we are.
