FacebookTwitterDiggStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditTechnoratiLinkedin

HUG powder test cells [UPDATE #5 - Testing Higgins' Powder]

Geschrieben von Ryan Hunt am .

Much has been going on in Minnesota and with everyone else busy, we are trying to find ways of getting more information to you all faster.

Two cells are being constructed into isothermal boxes for testing the array of nano and nano-micrometric powders of various types we have access to from Brian Ahern, QSI and Bob Higgins.

The development work has been captured into Evernote as this is really convenient to do for the team - in this case Malachi and Ryan - however, Alan Goldwater and Mathieu are starting to use it also, so we had to find a way of getting this information streamed onto the QuantumHeat.org site. We have been testing Zapier.com and cloudhq.net and are using both - one is making PDFs of posts and the other is making links to the Evernotes in a Google sheet.

Let us know what you think.


UPDATE #1 - Cool videos

Disassembling the powder cell

Swapping the micro Ni powder for the Quantum Sphere Inc nano Ni.


UPDATE #2 - Brian Ahern powder IN!

After a VERY generous donation of time, money and resources by Nikita Alexandrov of Permanetix Corporation, Last week, we received back the milled Zirconium Oxide / Palladium / Nickel matrix powder to the milling specification of Dr. Brian S. Ahern. A big thank you to Nikita.

About a third of this powder was today, 15th August, placed into the powder cell. A further third or so is expected to go into the "Sparky Cell" that another great volunteer - Skip has been working so hard on of late.

Check out the recent links to Evernote above for the details.

Keep watching this space!


UPDATE #3 - Loading!


UPDATE #4 - Calculated excess rising?

Calculated excess heat above calibration consistently trending upwards as Dr Brian Ahern's powder continues to absorb Hydrogen.



Ryan has made a live google spreadsheet that regularly updates showing calibration based calculations of excess heat.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VJ52Z0v9kVSv7-BntTARFXmUqi7hAfXzzLvWBr46dhk/edit#gid=0


UPDATE #5 - Testing Higgins' Powder, Dec 15, 2014

Powder from Bob Higgins has been installed into the cell and the cell calibration has been checked.  The calibration was right on from last time, still.  Nice.  What happens next?  Bob Higgins suggested this:

I saw results after heating in a vacuum over a weekend - a much lesser vacuum than you can achieve (~1E-1 torr).  Heat to about 250ºC in vacuum.  Let cool. Then apply about 80PSI of H2 and heat to about 300ºC.  After about 280ºC you may see excess heat.  Try turning off the heat and see which way the temperature goes.
 
Without the H2, it is a good dummy experiment to see how the temperature of your cell responds to turning on/off the heat - particularly turning off the heat.  There will be only a small delay and the temperature should start going down.  Look for changes in that when you turn off the heat with the H2 applied.
 
Base don this, our initial plan looks like this:
 
Step 1 -  Degas - Heat up to 250C  under dynamic vacuum.  We will try first with the valve closed to the cell and see if we get a pulse of gas out when we open it at 250C.  (about 2.4 watts input power)
 
Step 2 -Cool down from 250C.  (capture cool down curve for comparison) 
Heat to 300, cool down, again.  (3.2W) (another calibration comparison)
Heat to 350, cool down (4W)
 
Step 3 - Add 80psi H2, close the valve.
 
Step 4 - ramp up power and temp and observe the pressure and the power out 
 
Steps 1, 2 should happen today.  Steps 3 and 4 will be several small steps and will take most of tomorrow.  On Wednesday we can turn the power off and see how the time constants compare.  We may test heat and cool several cycles.

 

 

 

Comments   

 
0 #260 KarrySmall 2017-12-30 11:33
I have checked your page and i have found some duplicate content, that's why you don't rank high in google's search results, but there is a
tool that can help you to create 100% unique content, search for: Boorfe's tips
unlimited content
Quote
 
 
0 #259 FirstLauna 2017-11-19 15:45
I see you don't monetize your page, don't waste your traffic,
you can earn additional cash every month because you've got high
quality content. If you want to know how to make extra bucks, search for:
Boorfe's tips best adsense alternative
Quote
 
 
-1 #258 Ecco 2014-12-18 19:56
@MFMP: if what is happening right now according to Bob Higgins is mostly reduction of the oxides, wouldn't a higher cell temperature be helpful?
Quote
 
 
0 #257 Ecco 2014-12-17 11:00
Interesting rise, possibly hinting some excess heat generation:


http://i.imgur.com/KMwDc1Z.png

Notice the pressure...!
Quote
 
 
0 #256 Ecco 2014-12-17 09:19
I'm impressed by the ability of Higgins' powder to absorb hydrogen at temperature. Pressure dropped from about 108 psi to 5.5 psi as of now, and it still is. Apparently no signs of excess heat yet, though.
Quote
 
 
0 #255 AlanG 2014-10-09 01:47
Quoting Ryan Hunt:
. If I saw the well temp exceeding the shell temp, though, that would be interesting.


Ryan, that is exactly what caught my attention. T_well is running 0.5C hotter then RTD_hot. Could this be calibration error? If not, there's something worth a closer look!

Here's another snapshot.


A t_diff of 0.2C isn't very much, but that's just through the thickness of the cell wall.
Quote
 
 
0 #254 charlie tapp 2014-10-08 21:17
Just found out about mr. Rosie's third party test looks pretty interesting! Do you think there will be more interest now?
Quote
 
 
0 #253 Ryan Hunt 2014-10-08 20:59
The cell may be powered down, but the water jacket is still active. That is what is holding the cell higher than ambient. If I saw the well temp exceeding the shell temp, though, that would be interesting.
Quote
 
 
0 #252 Ged 2014-10-08 00:08
Well, that sure as heck is fascinating, AlanG. Thank you for this analysis. It's obvious in hindsight that observing continued heat production after input power cessation is a great way to test a residual LENR effect.
Quote
 
 
0 #251 AlanG 2014-10-07 16:34
With the cell input power zero for several days now, the internal temperatures are as much as 4 degrees above ambient. It doesn't seem like the vacuum insulation could be so good as to retain significant heat over that long an interval, especially with the small thermal mass of the core.


Where is the heat coming from? Apparently from the cell core, because RTD_hot is consistently about 0.5 degree below t_well. Ambient temp variation seems to have a small effect on RTD_cold, suggesting that the heat flow is minimal by conduction through the cell stem. Yet the calculated excess power doesn't seem consistent with the inside of the cell being hotter than the outside.
Quote
 
 
0 #250 Robert Greenyer 2014-09-17 14:38
@All

The vacuum pump has failed again badly and so the experiment is effectively down at the moment. We will look at solutions to resolve this.
Quote
 
 
0 #249 Ged 2014-09-15 22:57
Huh. The notebook graphs on the oscillation looks like a classic type 1 bifurcation both beginning and ending the major oscillatory period in the temperature graphs. Useful information for anyone trying to model the system, and suggests there were two processes at work (e.g. temperature vs condensation/ev aporation cycle). The fact it died down now seems to support Ecco's ideas about it being oxygen or maybe pure water vapor baking out of the material (maybe not by a breakdown of the zirconium oxide, but some other reservoir) and mixing with the hydrogen into water; which then was pumped out over time. I'm sure there are other explanations that can fit the type 1 bifurcation like behavior, but I can't think of them off hand ("sparking" of the material reaction with hydrogen?)

Interesting to see what this will do to the performance of the powder now that it seems to have passed for the time being.
Quote
 
 
0 #248 Ecco 2014-09-15 17:25
@AlanG: I didn't do any math to tell the truth, it was pure speculation and you're likely more right than I am.

More basically speaking, my idea was that if water is getting formed as hypothesized, perhaps the zirconium oxide in the powder could have something to do with that as I doubt there is still any humidity from previous ambient exposure left in the powder. Consequently, if water is getting formed it is also probably conceivable that free O2 is as well, for example through catalytic water splitting processes exhibited by similar nanomaterials in other LENR studies.
Quote
 
 
0 #247 AlanG 2014-09-15 16:58
@Ecco
That is an interesting hypothesis. The bond strength of ZrO2 is very high, 760 kJ/mol according to
web.chem.ucsb.edu/~zakariangroup/11---bonddissociationenergy.pdf
But an article at pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2002/CP/b109887j#!divAbstract suggests there is some reduction of surface defect sites at lower energy.

Finally, the abstract at www.nature.com/nature/journal/v191/n4794/abs/1911192a0.html states that no bulk reduction is seen up to 2500C and 150 Bar H2. At higher temps there's a hint that reduction by atomic hydrogen is possible.
Quote
 
 
0 #246 Ecco 2014-09-14 06:25
@MFMP: on temperature oscillations, etc.

I'm starting to wonder if heating the cell under pressurized H2 atmosphere isn't slowly stripping away oxygen from the active powder's zirconium oxide, forming trace amounts of water and gaseous O2 in the process. This could explain what you're seeing with temperature oscillations (due to water vapor randomly affecting the heat flow) and perhaps even what Dr.Ahern observed, including random violent explosive events (once O2 concentration inside the cell gets high enough to form an explosive mixture).
Quote
 
 
0 #245 Robert Greenyer 2014-09-11 20:42
@Ecco

Lenka, Ryan and myself had a lengthy debate about that today. We agreed that lowing the pressure delivery would make it very difficult to know the loading ratio, for now it was decided to let it run and focus on other cells, ones that may be engineered to remove any chance of convection effects that we suspect may be going on at the top of this cell.

The experiment is producing good data the we feel we can learn from.
Quote
 
 
0 #244 Ecco 2014-09-11 15:13
@MFMP:by attempting to substantially decrease H2 pressure while the cell is hot you should be able to observe whether there actually is a correlation between pressure and calculated excess power or if it's just coincidental (which would imply this could instead be correlated with something else like H2 absorption - loading ratio - rather than the pressure drop itself).
Quote
 
 
0 #243 Robert Greenyer 2014-09-05 10:13
@All

Bad news, looks like the vacuum pump has failed

Good news, it fails safe - the experiment core just gets cooler

Ryan is at a conference so it might be a few days before a proper verdict on the vacuum pump.
Quote
 

Add comment


Here is your generous contributions so far towards our $500,000 target, thanks everyone! : $45,020   Please Donate
See the current state of our booked costs here