The GS4.2 reheat experiment data has finally been posted at http://data.hugnetlab.com/
Click to VIEW FC0600 at the bottom of the test definitions list. Then click on the "From" time and set it to 9/17 03:00 using the slider controls.
The pressure plot illustrates the reversible LiH decomposition and recombination over the range of 425-1050 °C in the core (about 50-100 degrees hotter than the outside temperatures shown).
We ended the test run at around 21:00 utc. We learned some useful things about the reactor and the test apparatus. The data will be uploaded to a Google Docs repository later today, to be announced here.
Regarding the Google Hangout platform, it's not necessary to have a mic or camera online, and both can be disabled easily. The important point is that there is a text chat facility that we use exclusively for these events. You enable the text sidebar by clicking on an icon at the top left of the screen. The icon is hidden until you mouse over it, and I apologize for not mentioning that earlier. A transcript of the text chat will be included in the archive if and when available.
Thanks to Ecco and Justa Guy for their stalwart support and help.
AlanG
The experiment is still running, and the hangout is still active at the same link address shown above.
We'll be doing some more heat cycles. If you have suggestions for other test parameters, feel free to chime in.
I've started a GS4 reheat. I have a Google Hangout set up with the various data streams and chat:
talkgadget.google.com/.../...
If you aren't able to join directly, let me know your email and I'll send an invite.
Today's experiment had two goals:
The final heat up cycle is about to begin at 06:30 utc.
The legends on the pressure dial aren't readable unfortunately. To synchronize the data with the video, we need a "clapper" mark.
The data file has 172550 records, or roughly one per second. So the critical point of interest (00:35) is somewhere around record number 63000.
The attached chart shows records 63701-64500. From that we can see that the 'event' happens at record 63878
The data file has eight columns, separated by a single space. Here are data descriptions for the columns, with the graph legend for each:
1) Elapsed in tenths of seconds (not shown on graph)
2) reactor temp "series 1"
3) geiger CPM "series 2"
4) Current (A) "series 3"
5) Voltage (V) "series 4"
6) Power (W) "series 5"
7) PID Set point "series 6"
8] Triac pwm "series 7"
Yes there is some confusion. We did two separate runs. The second one (GS4.2) used a new heater coil and mullite reactor cell, and was carefully calibrated before the second run. The analyses done by GED and ECCO used the correct calibration data and found no excess heat, with a data resolution of about 1% of T (±10°C).
Your point is a good one though, in that the construction of the Glowstick design leads to some variation in the balancing of the active and null thermocouples. This must be accounted for by calibrating the two thermocouples against steady-state input power before the fuel is added. There is experimental evidence that the difference in TC readings is due to the conduction of the longer alumina filler rod in the null side of the cell.
Hi me356,
I wonder if you have any comments on our recent GS4 tests. This is the closest we've come to replicating Parkhomov's reported parameters, and there was no sign of excess heat beyond the range of measurement uncertainty. I'd appreciate your insight towards designing the next test.
Thanks,
Alan Goldwater / MFMP
I am perfectly sure that it will work. At this time there is no room to be sceptic as there are so many cases with success.
We have still not replicated Focardi/Piantelli work which may be prerequisite for Rossi effect. LENR is probably very sensitive for inpurities so we need very tight lab conditions to make it work.
If it was that easy, then LENR was discovered much sooner.
Bob, check also the start of the Padua data for a zero gauge pressure reference point. The sensor has an accuracy spec of 2% of full scale, so the possible error at zero is ±32 psi. I suspect it may be showing atmospheric pressure within the error margin. You'll also have to account for any difference from the supply voltage used at Padua.
AlanG
MFMP fb page
QuoteDisplay MoreAfter over 3 months, it would appear the Padua cell is still well under atmospheric pressure.[]=[lexicon]Project Dog Bone[/lexicon]=[]Preparing the ground for long run experiments - somewhere in Eastern Europe, me356 establishes that there appears to still be a partial vacuum in the Padua cell.
0.5V = Gauge pressure
4.5V = 1600 psi
Output = 0.477 - 0.478V @ 24.8ºC
Output is Ratio-metric, here is the last live data point from Padua recording
External Content youtu.beContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
So this is 9psi or 0.62 bar below ambient pressure. Doesn't look like it has leaked at all!
QuoteHere is an overview of the in-progress set-up of the equipment for non-contact long term control of reactors - currently attached to the Padua cell.It is hoped that data for the following will be available.PCE-830 power monitoringOptris Pi 160 monitoring1000 5V pulse per 1kw hour pulses in streamAmbient temp K-TypeTemperature from IR gun (outside core, outside cement)Temperature from K-Type (outside core, embedded in cement)Pulse to triacPressureCounts per minute from Geiger Counter
[/quote]
Why add another variable by introducing mullite? Stick with alumina that makes the thermal conductivity effect much simpler at the operating temperature of the reactor.
GS4 will use a mullite tube because that is what Parkhomov uses and Rossi may use as well. In addition, there's evidence from Celani's work that Si may have a significant role in the reaction. As an alternative, an alumina tube could be used, with some silica added to the fuel.
The mullite tubes we bought from Coorstek are very inexpensive compared to high-purity alumina, and won't need machining to use with Swagelok fittings.
A few days ago I finished installing and testing a 2 kVA heater power isolation transformer. It seems to work well and eliminates the leakage current in the TC ground circuit. One surprise came in a second test which melted the type K TC in the core (1400+°C). A summary report has been added to the GS3 open archive:
https://drive.google.com/open?…xJkjesxe4kNVh5WEt3cVEyOUk
Another approach would be to make the cylindrical reactor part of a microwave coaxial conductor. That is the energy would enter via a high power coaxial cable from one end, with the ceramic being a continuation of the the dielectric and the reactive core being a continuation of the central conductor.
That is how the Brillouin "Hot tube" appears to work. Look at pages 9-11 of patent application US20140332087. Nickel or another metal is sputtered or electroplated onto the inner surface of a ceramic tube. Paragraph 75 of the image descriptions states "The central portion of the core....defines the electrodes of a coaxial transmission line."
AlanG
In the Glowstick experiments, I found several additional sources of thermocouple error. The electrical conductivity of ceramics increasing with temperature also applies to typical refractory cements. I found that silica+alumina types were a particular problem when approaching 1000°C, when the silica component liquifies and migrates into any available void or crack. This loosens the bond, and forms a potential conduction path through the body of the cement.
Another problem I noted was the sensitivity of the thermocouple to minute changes in the thermal conduction path at its attachment point. Most cements will shrink as they cure and this can break all or part of the bond at the substrate. The thermal path to the thermocouple is thus changed from conduction to a mix of conduction and radiation across the gap, however small it might be. There may also be a subsequent variation in surface contact due to differential thermal expansion of the cement, substrate and thermocouple metals. It may be even more pronounced in this experiment, where the thermocouple is attached directly to the metal fuel tube.
This has proved to be a difficult engineering problem, resulting in rather large error bars for the temperature measurement, as much as ±50°C at 1000°C operating temperature. As a consequence, measurement of thermal gain less than 1.1 is not possible. I would want to see greater than 1.2 in my experiments before claiming anything. I'm working on better thermal coupling technique and welcome any suggestions.
AlanG
