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.
Please take general chatter elsewhere.
Alan Fletcher
Member
- Member since May 27th 2016
- Last Activity:
Posts by Alan Fletcher
-
-
As for spreadsheets wrong: I've pointed out (as Jed must surely agree) that some of the spreadsheet columns have been misleading (not wrong, but equally therefore not to be relied upon). Examples: Power in measurement (different for cal and active tests). Air velocity measurement (not air velocity measurement, but calculation from fan power).
The spreadsheets were for internal use (to derive results and charts for publication), and were never intended to be shown to anyone. The column headings were perfectly fine for that purpose. -
Have you verified that the hotwire anemometer is not recommended for turbulent systems.?
You need to show calculation of why not rather than a ROT.. based on turbulent intensity.
What do you recommend... a pitot tube?
Wkiipedia
""Hot-wire anemometers, while extremely delicate, have extremely high frequency-response and fine spatial resolution compared to other measurement methods, and as such are almost universally employed for the detailed study of turbulent flows, or any flow in which rapid velocity fluctuations are of interest.""
I raise a concern. I am not an expert. I have no recommendations, except that the Google Calorimetry team has the resources to do this and should be urged to do so.
In my opinion : Hot Wire Anemometers (and Infrared Thermometers ... remember Lugano, etc) are excellent for showing DIFFERENCES of values in space and time. But they are not so good for measuring absolute, qualitative values.
I defer to that detailed lab discussion, and to the warnings by several manufacturers NOT to use hot wire anemometers in turbulent flows. -
Thanks : https://www.sanyodenki.com/arc…_pdf/San_Ace_97BM33_E.pdf
109BM12GC2-01
Max 12V 0.6A 3800 RPM 0.82 m^3/min
(Velocity will be from that volume & area of the tube)
Hmm... that model has a PULSE SENSOR ... maybe measure the RPM, so the output is linear with RPM (rather than cube-root of watts?) -
I do not know what you mean by this. What curve? The blower calibration is Fig. 4.
The values used in his formula A*exp(Wb/w)+B for M19/R20 -
Do we have the EXACT model (and nominal specs RPM/Watts/Volume) used in M19/R20?
-
I suggested (in this topic) that Google should review the Mizuno Air Calorimetry
My concerns are at : Mizuno reports increased excess heat
Moderators : maybe a Mizuno Calorimetry thread? -
Can you give me the M19/R20 curve values from the spreadsheet? (One cell will suffice)
-
Review of Mizuno's Air-Flow Calorimetry.
NOTE 1: I am *NOT* an expert
NOTE 2 : I am ONLY concerned with the fan (blower), not with the internals of the box or the conduction/convection/radiation from the walls of the boxThis data is all in a google spreadsheet (which grew as I added stuff : it needs to be redone)
Google sheet : anyone can view
Links :
Papers :M17/R19 https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTpreprintob.pdf Mizuno 2017 R19 Reactor
This is the Mizuno 2017 R19 reactor paper
M19/R20: https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTexcessheata.pdf Mizuno 2019 R20 Reactor
This is the Mizuno 2019 R20 reactor paperFan Laws :
FAN-LAWS https://www.axair-fans.co.uk/n…rstanding-basic-fan-laws/ Explanation of Fan Laws
A simple explanation of fan laws
ETB-FAL https://www.engineeringtoolbox…-affinity-laws-d_196.html Engineering Toolbox Fan Affinity Laws
ETB-FAL-TEMP https://www.engineeringtoolbox…e-fan-capacity-d_144.html Engineering Toolbox Fan-Law Temperature
Hot-wire anemometer concernsHWA http://www.lth.se/fileadmin/ht…211/lab2b-pm-Eng-2009.pdf Hot Wire Anemometer Lab
HWA-MFG https://www.trutechtools.com/M…re-Anemometer_c_1001.html Hot Wire Anemometer Manufacturer Warning
Mizuno Volume-to-Power Curves and Formula
Mizuno presents a callibration plot of velocity vs fan power for each reactor
(I hand-digitized these from his diagrams)
He then uses a formula which fits a curve to these points
He gives the parameters for M17/R19 (used in a spreadsheet Jed posted)
I haven't seen the parameters for M19/R20 : Anonymous posted some which I used
Fan Law Summary
The VOLUME of air is proportional to the RPM of the fan
The POWER to produce a given volume is the CUBE of the RPM
(I inverted the formula to give the volume for a given power)
Chart 1 : M17/R19The round,black circles are Mizuno's callibration points.
The blue stars are from Mizuno's curve. But note that it is asymptotic to 4
The green triangles are "Fan Law" results, based on Mizuno's top-right point
(The fit is good down to 1 W / 2 m/sec)
Chart 2 : Temperature-dependence
Mizuno reported an ambient temperature of 20C and a maximum operational temperature of 60C
The velocity (and hence volume) varies with temperature (as does the density and specific heat).
The results here are for the fan-law values at 20C, 40C and 60C
Chart 2
I cannot see a temperature calculation in the M17/R19 spreadsheet. They should be included.
NOTE: Mizunos formula will UNDER-estimate the volume at higher temperatures.
Now on to the M19/R20 results
Chart 3 : Mizuno M19/R20 callibration vs M17/R19 formula
Mizuno says that the M19/R20 reactor was usually operated at 6.5 watts, but the callibration is only done up to 5.5 W
Chart 4 : Anonymous provided a fit to the M19/R20 reactor, and I used Fan-law from the top-right point
The curve for the formula FITS the results, but this fan does not seem to follow the FAN LAW. Why not?
Hot-Wire Anemometer
The fan/blower system is far into the area of turbulent flow.
The lab notes http://www.lth.se/fileadmin/ht…211/lab2b-pm-Eng-2009.pdf clearly say :
As a general rule-of-thumb, conventional hot wire anemometry should not be used if the local turbulence intensity is higher than about 35%, at least not for quantitative purposes. Apart from the mix-up of velocity components (cross-talk), it is evident that a hot wire can not distinguish between what is forward and backward, it behaves like a rectifier.
(Remember Defkalion's flow meter?)
One manufacturer also has a "turbulent flow" warning. -
The anemometer traverses of the outlet of a 64 mm ID tube, 60 cm long, using a 65 mm OD axial fan were a little unusual (unexpected by me anyway).
Several times higher velocity was measured at the tube edges than in the middle. This is the opposite of what I was expecting. This may be an axial fan thing.
Thanks for picking up on this with ACTUAL measurements.
I've been doing some research on the fan issue ... (I am *NOT* an expert in fluid dynamics!!) .. but I've been tied up with other stuff (like backstage crew for a shakespeare production).
I'll post some results (and concerns) shortly. -
-
Rossi debunked himself completely, in the Penon report. I have never seen better proof of a fraud. See:
The Penon report is self-consistent, and matches a lot of the external data (such as when reactors were stated to be down). The power was well recorded, and the recorded flow is consistent with the capability of the prominent pumps. One Big Frankie goes down, and the flow is 25% less.
The killer is the heat disposal and the changing explanations. -
Typo in the caption to Fig 8 p6 ?
Figure 8. Calibration with blower power only, and no power to the reactors. The temperature rise of ∼3.5◦C is probably caused by waste heat from the blower motor reaching the outlet RTDs.
But the graph shows about 0.35◦C : Vertical axis (Temp Difference) is 0.1 0.2 ... 0.5 C
Also : Is there a model number for the blower? Is it centrifugal, or a fan? -
-
I think that with the money available that was a reasonable approach : vary everything systematically.
I didn't see any mention of stimulus, though.
There is a paper in preparation -- wait and see, I guess. -
Study finds scientific reproducibility does not equate to scientific truth
https://phys.org/news/2019-05-scientific-equate-truth.html
Reproducible scientific results are not always true and true scientific results are not always reproducible, according to a mathematical model produced by University of Idaho researchers. Their study, which simulates the search for that scientific truth, will be published Wednesday, May 15, in the journal PLOS ONE....
Within the model, the rate of reproducibility did not always correlate with the probability of identifying the truth, how fast the community identified the truth and whether the community stuck with the truth once they identified it. These findings indicate reproducible results are not synonymous with finding the truth, Devezer said.
Compared to other research strategies, highly innovative research tactics resulted in a quicker discovery of the truth. According to the study, a diversity of research strategies protected against ineffective research approaches and optimized desirable aspects of the scientific process.
...
-
https://www.usguernsey.com The American Guernsey Association
-
E-Cat world is mentioned in the credits, but shouldn't it have an entry in Social/News Media? (Generally pro-rossi, but reports on LENR news as well. Active forum.)
-
1b : Water flow : the diaphragm pump used has the same properties as the Prominent -- at very low head the actual output is much greater than the rated output. They measured the ACTUAL flow.
LMI-J56D : http://support.lmipumps.com/Document/LMIDOC-705991255-630Back Pressure / Anti-Syphon Valve
If you are pumping downhill or into low or no system pressure, a back pressure / antisyphon device such as LMI®’s Four Function Valve (4-FV) should be installed to prevent over pumping or syphoning.
*CAUTION*WHEN PUMPING DOWNHILL OR INTO LOW OR NO PRESSURE
SYSTEM, A BACK PRESSURE / ANTI-SYPHON DEVICE SHOULD
BE INSTALLED TO PREVENT OVERPUMPING OR SYPHONING.4. Back Pressure [ valve ]
Supplies approximately 25 psi back pressure to prevent overpumping when little or no system back pressure is present. -
As for the absence of water overflow, how can you say so? I would make you notice that, contrary to the previous test held on December 2010, when the water hoses were transparent, the outflow water hose used in the January 2011 demo was a black opaque one (1a). Wonder why.
The main issue, for this second flaw (2), is that the value of the maximum flow rate of the pump was not specified in the calorimetric report. This is absolutely not correct for a scientific document and it is highly suspicious.
> As for the absence of water overflow, how can you say so?
https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGreportonhe.pdf
Dr Gilberto Galantini
5- I made my measurements only when the temperature was exactly 100.1 Celsius
[ Implies steam, not water ]
12- An empirical confirmation, not rigorous though, is the fact that I extracted many timesthe probe from the chimney of the reactor, and it was “ictu oculi” dry: being the
chimney a small vertical cylinder, due to the gravity in short time it would be filled by
water, if significant amount of water shouldn’t evaporate, with two consequences: i)
the temperature could not be 101.1 Celsius and ii) the probe would have been wet.> The main issue, for this second flaw (2), is that the value of the maximum flow rate of the pump was not specified in the calorimetric report.
That is the nominal (or maybe minimum value as for the Prominent).
The ACTUAL MEASURED value trumps the nominal value.
The fact that he couldn't remember the exact measured value during an interview is irrelevant. Levi said at the time he couldn't remember, and would look it up.
Taking a snapshot of the system at around 35 minutes
https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…rossi-20110114-test2-png/
Flow 168 g ( = 0.168 kg)
Time 45 secs
Power : 400W (= 0.400 kW)
Pressure 1 bar
Steam Quality 80% (dry-out for tube boiler)gives (via my steam calculator)
https://www.lenr-forum.com/att…rossi-20110114-test2-png/Energy Including Controller Total 8.066 kWh Input 0.400 kWh Excess 7.666 kWh COP (Input+Output/Input) 21.164