H. Zhang: First successful independent Mizuno R20 replication!

1st Official Post

    I am pleased to report a replication of Mizuno's experiment by H. Zhang:


    https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ZhangHreproducti.pdf


    Excess heat started at ~4 W and has now reached 9.6 W. Be careful when comparing this to the original experiment, because the mass of nickel mesh is smaller. [INCORRECT. THAT WAS A TYPO IN THE PAPER, WHICH I HAVE FIXED.]


    The calorimetry is MUCH better than Mizuno's. It is splendid.


    Mizuno expressed some reservations about these results because the heat peters out after 2 or 3 hours. He thinks this might be caused by "impure gas in the reactants or slight differences in nickel." I do not think this is a problem because:

    1. Zhang ran several times with a mesh that produced no heat (p. 18).
    2. I think the total heat release is too large to be explained as impure gas.
    3. The reaction is getting stronger between the second and third runs, from 4 W 20 kJ up to 9.7 W 47 kJ. If this were caused by gas coming out of the nickel mesh, I suppose it would fade away. He does not open the cell or change the mesh between runs.
    4. Zhang replaced the deuterium gas with argon. That killed the reaction. I hope he did not clobber it permanently! Yesterday he told me he went back to deuterium, but it is still dead.

    It looks to me that Zhang's Deuterium concentration was way too high at 0.3 MPa (300,000 Pa) since Mizuno recommended much lower: maybe higher D loading reduced the excess heat, Takahashi's group using Ni/Pd/ZrO nanoparticles also reported transient low excess heat levels with high deuterium concentrations. Mizuno reports:

    Permeability, not high loading, is necessary
    The results in Table 1 suggest that high permeability is necessary for excess heat, but high
    loading is not. On the contrary, high loading apparently reduces excess heat.
    Nickel subjected to the treatment described in this paper can be loaded much higher than
    pure nickel [2]. This appears to be a necessary condition to produce excess heat. However, it also
    appears that it is not highly loaded deuterium itself, but rather the ability to load (permeability)
    that is necessary.
    Figure 9 shows there is no clear trend from pressure.
    10
    Figure 9. Deuterium pressure and excess heat, with 200 W input power. Data from Table 1.
    Optimum pressure is between 100 and 300 Pa. It should not exceed 6,000 Pa. The reactant
    will probably not load at less than 100 Pa. However, as shown in Table 1, once it has loaded,
    pressure can be pumped down as low as 2.3 Pa and the reaction continues. The gas does not
    readily come out of from the metal once it loads, even when the gas is pumped out and the
    temperature is raised to 400 deg C. Table 1 shows that that pressure was reduced to 2.3 Pa on
    5/11. It gradually rose to 6.4 Pa by 5/16 as the gas deloaded, but the reaction continued.
    Figure 10 shows that the reaction strength is inversely proportional to loading. Loading close
    to zero produces 1.85 W/g of nickel. As loading increases, heat declines to 1.65 W/g. This is
    contrary to what has been reported with palladium, which is that high loading correlates with
    high heat. Perhaps this can be explained if what is needed is high permeability with relatively
    low loading. This might increase flux, which McKubre says enhances the cold fusion effect. [3]

    • Official Post

    Good thing that Zhang provided the spreadsheet of data. Also good thing he used a calorimeter that is much less likely to be shredded apart by pathoskeptics than Mizuno’s.


    We see now, putting together with Mastromatteo ICCF 22 abstract, that the deuterium is what plays a main role in the excess heat. This is very interesting to see.

    Link to Zhang’s spreadsheet data.

    https://docviewer.yandex.ru/vi…xNTY2NDY1NTAzNzkwfQ%3D%3D

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

    Like 4

    Good understanding Dr Richard

    i also shared personal thoughts by MP to Storms to explain H behavior during deloading but probably i shouln't be enough skilled to hope an answer :)


    So, i share own thoughts to all :


    Now the most important thing to consider as a second stage is the rate between H+/D+ trapped and number of free electrons surrounding available.

    that is why we need clusters distributed in a disparate way inside lattice so that they can be crossed by a sufficient number of electrons of the surroundings.


    In few words, first you make an H+/D+cluster which should have closer interatomic distances then you make an electrons cluster ( if of course are enough electrons available arround, think deloadind to do that) then you push electrons clusters onto nuclei cluster to make a real strong condensed state.

    Now, how to makes electron's clusters ? the main way remains the discharges with short time to avoid H+/D+ separation when you will inject electrons onto nuclei.

    Or you use IRs which make surface plasmons as well explained by last Google's patent for example. You understand now the link with Hagenstein's lasers work.

    IRs are also used by Mizuno's R20 or Rossi to Ecat Ht to sweep Pd/Ni or SS/Li.

    I know this is obvious to most here... but just pondering it:


    The heat of adsorption of this amount of hydrogen on nickel seems to me to be a two or three orders of magnitude less than could explain the heat generated.


    https://royalsocietypublishing…bs/10.1098/rspa.1970.0010


    Do we know how many mols of gas was included? (I was estimating about 0.000185 mol)


    It’s interesting the profile seems to indicate that sorbtion plays some role though.


    Just thought it was interesting to mention.


    Edit. If the gas is being breathed by the metal. Or acting like a bi metallic heat pump then it would take something like 1000 full adsorption cycles with no equivalent cooling due to desorption to account for this excess heat. Desorption with out equivalent heat loss in this case would normally be a hard to explain process.

    I don't think the 0.3MPa is the reactor pressure. They say they inject 0.0002 moles of D2. If you assume a 3L vessel volume, that gives about 168Pa of pressure which is in the correct zone. The 0.3MPa seems to be a mistranslation.


    Anyway, the 0.0002 moles of D2 gives 57.2J of heat if burned (heat of combustion) so the 47,000J output from this experiment is 783 x the total chemical energy of the D2 injected into the device.

    • Official Post

    Zhang already addressed the chemical heat possibility by stating “The added deuterium gas is 1.5 ml 0.3 MPa, about 0.0002 mole, and the chemical energy is about 60 joules. The measured excess heat is much larger than the chemical energy.”

    To get respect (from me anyway), replication is just that. It's not any somewhat positive result. Mizuno's minimum claim with the R20 setup was 50W in and 250W out. Never mind the fireplace claim with 3kW. I don't remember the running time but it was long -- someone correct me if this not right but days rather than hours. So 10W won't cut it. 20 minutes won't cut it. 10% more output than input won't cut it. Those are "usual results" in the same sense as "usual suspects." Want respect for replicating Mizuno, get results at least in the same general area of magnitude that he did for both absolute power out and power ratio (out/in).

    Previously, I wrote that Zhang's tests tend to "peter out" after about 3 hours. I said they stop producing heat. That is incorrect. The spreadsheet shows the heat did not peter out completely. At the end of Test 1 the reactor was still producing 0.2 W. At the end of Test 2 it was producing 0.4 W, and at the end of the graph for Test 3, it was producing 1.8 W.

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    To get respect (from me anyway), replication is just that. It's not any somewhat positive result.


    Then you do not understand experimental science. What you describe would be the expectation from an engineering project, not a laboratory experiment. Getting 100 W or 200 W from this experiment the first time around would not be a replication. It would a miracle. No one with experience in ground-breaking experimental science would expect that. Mizuno and I are very pleased Zhang is getting any measurable heat at all, and pleased that it is increasing.


    Mizuno is somewhat wary about this, because he thinks it might be a chemical effect from contaminants leaking in from the mesh. I doubt it. If Zhang's heat continues to increase, and the duration of the reactions increase, we can rule that out.


    Mizuno's own R20 cell with a new mesh is only getting 20 or 30 W. Would you say he did not replicate himself? That's absurd.


    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    Mizuno's minimum claim with the R20 setup was 50W in and 250W out.


    That was the maximum claim with a calorimeter, not the minimum. I do not have the complete history for this reactor, but it was less than that most of the time. It is presently 20 to 30 W, as noted.



    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    So 10W won't cut it. 20 minutes won't cut it.


    The first two tests were 165 minutes and 140 minutes, performed consecutively after a 10-minute interruption. The third test was 155 minutes. That's 460 minute total, which is much longer than 20 minutes. There was lingering excess heat after all three tests, 1.8 W after the last one. So it wasn't actually finished, but he stopped the spreadsheet there.


    You are setting arbitrary and meaningless standards for what will cut it and what will not. There is no scientific basis for your standards. You might as well reject the experiment because the calorimeter container is silver color and you want it to be purple instead.


    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    10% more output than input won't cut it.


    As I said before, the 10% is function of the insulation around the cell. It can be adjusted to any number you like. It is meaningless. Do you not understand how insulation works? This standard is not only arbitrary and meaningless, it is absurd, because Zhang could alter it easily. He will not, because that would make the experiment a pain the butt to operate. It would increase latency.

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    Want respect for replicating Mizuno, get results at least in the same general area of magnitude that he did for both absolute power out and power ratio (out/in).


    In other words:


    "I will only accept an impossible result. I demand that researchers do what no one on earth knows how to do. I will reject solid results from superb instruments that actually have been achieved in favor of imaginary results that meet an arbitrary, meaningless standard I set. I get to set the standards, not the researchers. Conventional standards such as signal to noise ratios don't count. Superb experiments such as McKubre's don't exist because I say they don't. I will move the goal post as far down the field as I want, right out of the playing field, out the parking lot, into the next county, to ensure that no cold fusion result will ever meet my exacting standards. Exacting and ever changing. I demand researchers produce the pot of gold from the end of the rainbow -- something they must chase forever at my bidding; something that I alone will define, and redefine, and define again, at whim. Their replications and data mean nothing to me, and my standards are the only ones that count."


    Thank you, oh Lord High Arbiter of Science. What would we do without you? We can toss out concepts such as signal to noise and the limits of chemistry (4 eV per atom) in favor of the new, all encompassing universal standard, which is defined as whatever the hell just popped into Seven_of_twenty's mind.

    Quote

    As I said before, the 10% is function of the insulation around the cell. It can be adjusted to any number you like. It is meaningless. Do you not understand how insulation works? This standard is not only arbitrary and meaningless, it is absurd, because Zhang could alter it easily. He will not, because that would make the experiment a pain the butt to operate. It would increase latency.


    By 10%, you mean excess heat compared to input heat. For example 100W in and 110W out. Assuming the 100W regulated input is constant, those numbers are not changed by insulation.


    Let's square this away first. Power put into the cell by whatever means (Joule or LENR) heats the cell. Insulation increases thermal resistance between the interior of the cell and the world exterior to the cell. In this way, it transiently decreases heat flow and increases internal temperature. Eventually, the increased interior temperature and therefore increased delta-T in-to-out will cause the heat flow out to equal heat in, overcoming the increased thermal resistance of the insulation. I am sure someone can explain this to you better than I. But the result is that the heat placed into the cell has to leave the cell or the temperature of the interior will rise without limit. Let's do it this way:


    At equilibrium, Power In = Power (heater) + Power (LENR) = Power Out


    If not, you don't have equilibrium and the system will not remain in that state. Insulation does not change the heat flow at equilibrium. It only changes the interior temperature for a given total power delivered inside the cell. One can not adjust heat flow at equilibrium or the ratio of power out to power in by increasing insulation. That's plainly incorrect and I regret not attending to it the first time you said it.


    I will address other errors in your posts if I find more time.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Previously, I wrote that Zhang's tests tend to "peter out" after about 3 hours. I said they stop producing heat. That is incorrect. The spreadsheet shows the heat did not peter out completely. At the end of Test 1 the reactor was still producing 0.2 W. At the end of Test 2 it was producing 0.4 W, and at the end of the graph for Test 3, it was producing 1.8 W.


    You'd need to compare those figures with the accuracy of the calorimetry. I'd not expect that to be better than 2% which means those are all equivalent to no excess. Another calibration after the last run would help. Of course I don't know what the accuracy is, but the author of this study could maybe address that.

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    By 10%, you mean excess heat compared to input heat. For example 100W in and 110W out. Assuming the 100W regulated input is constant, those numbers are not changed by insulation.


    Ah. I think you misunderstand. The numbers would be changed by insulation. Suppose it takes 100 W to heat the inside of the reactor to 250°C. * Now suppose you wrap the cell in insulation. It will take much less power to heat the inside, because the heat will not escape as easily. It is like the difference between heating the inside of a Dewar flask versus a regular test tube. Or like heating a house with poor insulation versus a well insulated house.


    In other words, the heater is needed to reach a certain temperature, and it would reach that temperature with much lower power. Instead of 100 W and 110 W, you might see 30 W in and 40 W out. Or 5 W in and 15 W out. That is, if 5 W was enough to raise the temperature to the operating point, with something like a large Dewar.


    (With a house, you also have factors like the air blowing in through poorly framed windows. Disregard that and think only of heat losses through something like an uninsulated attic.)


    This is also why you stay warmer in bed with lots of blankets. Your body produces ~100 W at rest. That does not change. You are warmer with more blankets because the heat escapes more slowly.


    So, if Mizuno wraps the cell in insulation, it will take far less input power to heat it to same temperature. He used to wrap his cells in insulation, and they did take less power. That was to regulate the internal temperature. That caused problems with latency. When he went to the air-flow calorimeter, the calorimeter chamber itself can be brought up to any temperature you like by changing the insulation around the calorimeter chamber and the air flow rate, so you do not have to regulate the cell temperature with insulation around the cell itself. That is more convenient.


    I apologize to you for being rude about this issue. I assumed you understood this, but apparently you did not.



    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    At equilibrium, Power In = Power (heater) + Power (LENR) = Power Out


    Correct. And the equilibrium temperature of the body inside the cell is a function of the insulation. It is low with a poorly insulated cell, and high with well insulated cell. The cell constant changes. For an isoperibolic cell, this is also a function of the thermal mass of whatever is inside the cell. I once tested a small plastic cell with 100 ml of water used as an isoperibolic calorimeter. I calibrated at 1.1 to 4.0 W. 1 W produced a ~3.9°C equilibrium temperature of water. That is how much warmer the water was above ambient after about 45 minutes. Use a Dewar vacuum flask instead, and 1 W may produce a ~20°C equilibrium temperature rise. It is a lot more sensitive but it is a pain in the butt to use, and it takes forever to reach equilibrium. I did try a Dewar once (a thermos bottle), out of curiosity, after Srinivasan told me about his experiences with them. I did not write down the numbers. You should try it.



    * That is not the actual figure, but it is close to that. I only have the outer surface temperatures.

    Quote from RobertBryant

    Of course THHnew asserts that air calorimetry is less accurate than water calorimetry..


    Zhang is doing Seebeck calorimetry, which is better than water, and way better than air. His calorimeter is a thing of beauty, as you see in his calibrations. The minimum power it can measure is 13 times better than Mizuno's calorimeter, and the losses are practically zero. That is to say, all of the heat is measured. The balance in the first calibration on p. 15 is 178.18 W in, 178.00 W out. 99.8989% recovered. That's outstanding! Whereas Mizuno has to estimate losses from the calorimeter chamber walls, as shown in Fig. 3. That works, but it adds a lot to the margin of error. With Mizuno's calorimeter at 178 W input, he would recover in the air stream . . . around 78%, or 136 W.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Ah. I think you misunderstand. The numbers would be changed by insulation. Suppose it takes 100 W to heat the inside of the reactor to 250°C. * Now suppose you wrap the cell in insulation. It will take much less power to heat the inside, because the heat will not escape as easily. It is like the difference between heating the inside of a Dewar flask versus a regular test tube. Or like heating a house with poor insulation versus a well insulated house.


    That is a very good point Jed. And no doubt the authors here will do that test. We can then see what are the results. The same apparent excess power with 10W input would be much more significant. However, if that transient is not excess heat it will not scale up in magnitude that way.

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.