General Update from HUG Lab
We are working incessantly on the science, the engineering, and all the organizational issues associated with all the kind offers of help we got last week at ICCF. Malachi, LENR lab wizard extraordinaire compiled this list of things we are doing this week in the shop and lab.
US Version 1.3 Cells:
We are currently loading the Celani wire in cell A. It is down to R/R0 of 0.88. We will let it load for a while still and then we will perform another live run. After the upcoming live run we will be making a few changes the to protocol.
We will consolidate our data, graphs, observations and feelings about protocol 2.0 and write up our conclusions. A few point are listed below:
-First live run (simultaneous run in US and EU)
-US live run with power through Celani wire in Cell A (#4)
-Calculations on chemical energy and apparent excess heat
When this is out of the way, we want to move in a different direction for the Celani V1.3 Cells. We want to make Cell B the new active cell and convert Cell A to a control cell. Here are a few ideas for this change:
-Take Celani wire out of cell A and analyze it. Leave NiCr wire in for heating.
-Take Celani wire out of cell A and cut a small piece off to analyze. Put the remainder in cell B to aid any possible LENR.
Optionally: Replace the NiCr wire in cell B with the Celani wire from cell A, or leave the NiCr in place and just add the wire from cell A as a third wire. Opinions?
We will consolidate our data, graphs, observations and feelings about protocol 2.0 and write up our conclusions. A few point are listed below:
-First live run (simultaneous run in US and EU)
-US live run with power through Celani wire in Cell A (#4)
-Calculations on chemical energy and apparent excess heat
When this is out of the way, we want to move in a different direction for the Celani V1.3 Cells. We want to make Cell B the new active cell and convert Cell A to a control cell. Here are a few ideas for this change:
-Take Celani wire out of cell A and analyze it. Leave NiCr wire in for heating.
-Take Celani wire out of cell A and cut a small piece off to analyze. Put the remainder in cell B to aid any possible LENR.
Optionally: Replace the NiCr wire in cell B with the Celani wire from cell A, or leave the NiCr in place and just add the wire from cell A as a third wire. Opinions?
CTC Business:
We built up a shiny new Concentric Tube Calorimeter to display at ICCF18. Now that the show is over, it's timet o put it to work. We have moved both of our CTCs to a new location in the corner of the LENR Lab. There is a wooden rack with space for four CTCs. We are qualifying and calibrating the second one while building up a third CTC concurrently.
CTC #1: 50m Constantan
We will continue this experiment based on some suggestions from Ecco, a frequent and much appreciated contributor. We will also start to prepare a report to discuss what we know so far. A few points below:
-Low resistance is difficult to trust the way we made the electrical connections
-LENR Stick starts to leak at high temperatures, leak not detectable.
-Aluminum foil allows us to reach a temp of +500C
CTC #2:
We are calibrating the second CTC and LENR Stick combo with an oxide wire. An experiment has not yet been defined for this CTC and LENR Stick. Suggestions? We have some short lengths of Celani wire still available. Another loading vs resistance test is a possibility.
Water Flow Calorimeter: Multi-wire LENR Stick
We have completed calibration on the water flow calorimeter. After 6 runs we have a 200 mW confidence interval at 95% and a 300 mW confidence interval at 99%. These are at high power, 32 Watts input.
We just completed assembly of a new LENR Stick with a total of 3 Celani wires. One 270 layer wire at 69 cm long, one 350 layer at 70 cm long and one 400 layer at 46 cm long. The resistance of these wires will be measured using a common ground wire for all three.
The protocol document is viewable here:
CTC #1: 50m Constantan
We will continue this experiment based on some suggestions from Ecco, a frequent and much appreciated contributor. We will also start to prepare a report to discuss what we know so far. A few points below:
-Low resistance is difficult to trust the way we made the electrical connections
-LENR Stick starts to leak at high temperatures, leak not detectable.
-Aluminum foil allows us to reach a temp of +500C
CTC #2:
We are calibrating the second CTC and LENR Stick combo with an oxide wire. An experiment has not yet been defined for this CTC and LENR Stick. Suggestions? We have some short lengths of Celani wire still available. Another loading vs resistance test is a possibility.
Water Flow Calorimeter: Multi-wire LENR Stick
We have completed calibration on the water flow calorimeter. After 6 runs we have a 200 mW confidence interval at 95% and a 300 mW confidence interval at 99%. These are at high power, 32 Watts input.
We just completed assembly of a new LENR Stick with a total of 3 Celani wires. One 270 layer wire at 69 cm long, one 350 layer at 70 cm long and one 400 layer at 46 cm long. The resistance of these wires will be measured using a common ground wire for all three.
The protocol document is viewable here:
Vacuum Bottle Calorimeter and other New Equipment
We are doing the testing and characterization of the vacuum bottle calorimeters that we brought to ICCF. A document explaining this device will be put together soon, since we already have the diagrams prepared and a lot of practice explaining it. We also have the water jacketed camera cell available, but no immediate tests defined.
More Power Supplies
We are assembling several more power supply/instrumentation trays to use with the new experiment apparatus that we have to play with.
Malachi and Angie seen here working on the new power supplies. The power supplies are documented here (rough draft only): Power Supply Manual (As you will see, much work remains for the user interface software.)
Comments
But first, there is the matter of due diligence. Lots of it. I could tell you that we have recruited a huge scientific advisory board consisting of nearly every one of the foremost researchers in the field who we were able to directly approach at ICCF18, but I would rather do it once I can name those advisors. Doing this requires a rather careful and deliberate process that I do not wish to undertake hastily, given the sensitivity of their employment considerations. We are at the beginning steps of the process still, owing to other, even more exciting preconditions that must be legally structured before we can proceed further into those steps. Meanwhile, science has been progressing at HUG and in Europe. We have been meeting and communicating with people across every level of society who are seeking to help us accomplish our goals, but we need to complete our carefully-delib erated, formal preparatory work before we can proceed to structuring many of these future relationships. We are also preparing the finishing work on a huge backlog of posts that we have been working up to, which you all will get to read shortly. In fact, other people might beat us to some of these posts, so keep your eye on the international press for a while....
Right now I am leaning towards going ahead the way it is and getting dynamic gradients by powering up and down in small steps. The advantage is we know what temperature the chamber is.
Any thoughts?
Enamelling and thermal expansion matching is a well understood science. Think cookware. RTD would be nice, but it comes down to resources.
By the way, speaking of improvements, would it be possible to use a RTD sensor on the steel converted Celani cells to measure the average outer temperature of the steel tube (or the average temperature of sections of it), like on the inner/outer tube on US CTC cells? This would allow to calculate the power emitted (even with the Stefan-Boltzman n law) much more accurately than with spot measurements using standard thermocouples.
A simple lagged steel tube, potentially, enamelled on the inside, may be best.
Ryan and I were discussing just this configuration last night.
Mathieu and I were discussing options last night and we came up with inner side gold coated quartz or even steel/copper. We recognise that getting above the curie temperature of nickel may be important.
That a temperature gradient along the cell length could be required is Celani's hypothesis, not mine. I merely adapted it to my design and proposed a possible mode of operation along what was suggested during ICCF18 (ie active H2 flux as a possible LENR trigger) and in the existing LENR literature (for example the Piantelli patent).
What I was questioning in my last post was the suggestion that a gas phase thermal gradient is required to bring more H2 molecules to the "party". I believe that at the gas pressures we are talking about there are already lots of H2 molecules per sec colliding with the active wire. Any convective enhancement provided by a thermal gradient in the gas phase would be minimal.
So, I don't think that temperature is going to be a limiting factor, quite the opposite in fact.
Does this argue against thermal gradients in gas phase as means to bring more H2 molecules to the active site? ie. the rate determining step in the chain is not the rate at which H2 can be brought to the surface but rather the rate at which absorbed H2 can be replenished at the LENR reaction site.
While Celani's suggestion of having a fixed gradient along the entire cell length might be helpful, I think it would be further useful to have a dynamic thermal gradient along it by heating up cyclically both ends of the steel reaction chamber. This is not in order to heat the wire itself (although this will ultimately happen), but to move hydrogen back and forward by heating it (and thus increasing its pressure) locally in a controlled manner (although not very selectively as you'd like to). This continuous hydrogen movement would be the flux to/from the active sites in the active material (Celani wires in our case) that during this year's ICCF was suggested being important for triggering LENR. As for why this would happen exactly, I don't know.
i.imgur.com/05omt3j.png
(In the version with two external heaters, the hot and cold sections would reverse cyclically)
This would be the approximate heating effect of the internal tubes on every wire wrap.
Having said that since presumably most of the LENR reaction takes place in the thin active layers deposited on the outer surface of the wire, one way to achieve a radial gradient is in fact to generate a longitudinal gradient. ie. bulk wire has relatively high thermal conductivity so core under a hotter section will infact be cooler than surface.
At some future junction it might be nice to try depositing the active layer directly onto those small tubes and running "coolant" inside rather than heater wire. ie. thermal gradient from hot gas to cooler tube.
In your proposed design the central quad tube heaters are designed to heat the wire by conduction. What if the purpose of those heaters was switched to becoming efficient H2 gas heaters? would one want to increase the surface area in contact with the gas even more?
i.imgur.com/8e0tcTY.png
EDIT: thinking about it, it would if it only used the "lower heater wire" on one end of the stick (the one on the left in this diagram) . The other end would be cooled by the water jacket (although the inner heating wire would still bring some heat from the inside along the entire cell length).
Either way, metal surfaces in contact with the partially ionized plasma would heat up quickly.
RSS feed for comments to this post