# Mizuno Airflow Calorimetry

• This is a TECHNICAL topic about Mizuno's Airflow Calorimetry.

We will analyze Mizuno's R19 and R20 reactors, and possibly make suggestions on improvements to the calorimetry.

• I'm going to put up a couple of blank posts ... and will fill them in later (eg photos of the system).

• The main areas of interest are as follows :

1. The ambient situation (Jed has some posts on this)

2. The INSIDE of a reactor : I don't think this relevant to the calorimetry, but it has been talked about

3. The INLET to the calorimetry box. I don't think this needs to be analyzed, except to record the inlet temperature
4 How the reactor(s) heat gets into the system (Conduction, convection, radiation).

(I personally think this is irrelevant.

5. The INSIDE of the calorimetry box. The flow may be laminar, rather than turbulent. Some heat may rise by convection to the top of the box.
(Again, I think this is irrelevant)
6. The outer WALLS of the calorimeter. Heat comes through the walls by conduction (R-value), and then escapes by convection and radiation. But with the reflective insulator this will probably be a small component of the total.
(maybe need an array of inside/outside thermocouples -- IR camera to see if there ARE hotspots, temparature differences)

7. The fan/blower outlet. I think this is the main one.
As I point out, The M17/R19 reactor results look well-behaved: they follow the "fan laws".
The M19/R20 is problematic (to me) : the calibration curve does NOT follow the fan laws. Why not?
Recommend measuring the fan RPM instead of/as well as input power.

The use of a hot-wire anemometer in turbulent flow might be problematic.

8. Power calculations given all of the above.
Temperature-dependence of fan air velocity, air density, specific heat ......
Curve fitting (fan law, Mizuno equation ...)

• The M19/R20 is problematic (to me) : the calibration curve does NOT follow the fan laws. Why not?

What is your knowledge on the precision of the fan laws when applied to particular fans?

Are they as precise as PV=nRT applied to ideal gases?

• I was wondering that.

They are widely used in HVAC for sizing a fan from the nominal spec .. so maybe at least 10% accurate.

Scientific? 1%?

I'd expect the fan laws to break down at the low end, where friction, efficiencies come into play .. as in the M17/R19

But the M19/R20 don't fit at all.

• This is a TECHNICAL topic about Mizuno's Airflow Calorimetry.

We will analyze Mizuno's R19 and R20 reactors, and possibly make suggestions on improvements to the calorimetry.

I think you are arriving late to the party and demanding a new keg of beer be opened, to a crowd that is already drunk, to use a fun analogy.

The air calorimetry used by Mizuno has been sliced and diced for well over a month and no real concern has been able to stand out, specially none that could explain the results reported as being erroneous.

Sure it could be done better, Mizuno himself has done as best as he could, which is impressive and a testimony of his skills as a researcher given the scarcity of resources and general adversities of working in a laboratory that was severely damaged by a destructive earthquake, and the calorimeter calibrations are enough to see that it is more than good enough to sustain the claim of excess heat being made by the papers.

So, if you think you have identified a previously overlooked potential source of error, could you state it in precise quantitative and qualitative terms in order to see the merit of your concern, and spare us of continuing the circular argument that has been already ongoing about this topic?

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

• . so maybe at least 10% accurate.

• Wild effing guess. Typical engineering tolerance before safety factor applied.

• Maybe there is a PhD thesis ...

Ön the precision of fan/centrifugal pump laws in the Mizuno R19/R20 experiment

now he just needs a few more measurements from a wattmeter

• Whatever issues one finds with the air calorimetry, one still has to explain dead on calibrations over the entire operating power range based on Joule heat. IIRC, that is what Jed reported.

• Needs an rpm counter to calibrate watts.

What about connecting a microphone to an oscilloscope and measure the frequency on the scope ?

• Too much white noise I suspect. Optical RPM counters are cheap and pretty good these days.

• Nearly all computer fans already measure the rotational speed and send a tach pulse through the yellow wire.

• I think you are arriving late to the party and demanding a new keg of beer be opened, to a crowd that is already drunk, to use a fun analogy.

So, if you think you have identified a previously overlooked potential source of error, could you state it in precise quantitative and qualitative terms in order to see the merit of your concern, and spare us of continuing the circular argument that has been already ongoing about this topic?

Scattered over 2700 posts in 4 topics. Some of which are scheduled to be closed. I planned to read them and link to important posts.

My concerns are in my original post : Mizuno reports increased excess heat

a) Why R20 doesn't seem to follow fan laws

b) No temperature correction (14% between 20C and 60C)

c) Hot wire anemometry in turbulent flows

• My concerns are in

1. Fan laws are inaccurate

2. Hot wire anemometers are used successfully and mostly in turbulent flows

AF needs to justify his concerns with refeernces which show clearly that Mizuno's results

conflict with laws and usage.

and not just repeat CONCERNS..