<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>QuantumHeat.org</title>
		<description>Discuss QuantumHeat.org</description>
		<link>http://www.quantumheat.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 08:51:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/284" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3369</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It looks like that the mild vacuum currently applied to EU cell A is partialy deloading the active wire from hydrogen, seeing how wire resistance is increasing. EDIT: maybe it was mainly the decrease in active wire measuring current which caused that.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2013 10:22:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3369</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3367</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is it over for the EU cell on this part of the protocol? I hope not, I was sure looking forward to seeing the resistance bottom out and start to climb.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2013 02:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3367</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3361</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Actually I didn't mean to suggest a shorter power cycling (for example 1 hour/30 minutes instead of 6 hours/1hour) - although that might be an idea too - but instead to increase the rate of cooling when power is removed (for example by actively cooling the cell with a blower or something else) and/or the rate of heating while temperature is rising toward the 35W temperature level (by temporarily boosting heater wire power during the heating phase, or by applying a small current to the active wire). In other words, making the cell cycle between a goal maximum temperature and a goal minimum temperature in the shortest time possible. Ideally, with no "holding" time.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:05:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3361</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3360</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Loading so far has given us a 24.23% drop in resistance from R0. You may be right about the cycling. I think we can do a set of faster cycling. There may be a little time before the US team has caught up.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:23:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3360</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3359</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I doubt that the currently set power cycling is for all intents and purposes doing anything else other than allowing measuring wire resistance when power is off. If you download the active wire resistance data and remove the periods where power gets switched off you get the expected curve for hydrogen absorption under constant conditions. http://i.imgur.com/BADoT5p.png http://i.imgur.com/BADoT5p.png[ http://i.imgur.com/TXJjkk6.png http://i.imgur.com/TXJjkk6.png To be fair there are indications that on the first 2-3 cycles in the graph above this might have increased loading a tiny little bit, meaning that to make this cycling have a tangible effect you probably need to cool and/or reheat the wire faster, which you probably don't want to attempt doing at this stage.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3359</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3355</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Celani reportedly uses his wires for months under higher pressures than what the MFMP is using before they have to be replaced.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 23:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3355</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3353</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Mathieu, I agree, we could even see the resistance start increasing but hydrogen loading would still be increasing. Unfortunately we do not know if too much can become bad. If very high loading causes mechanical swelling and numerous large cracks it could be bad. Can Celani give any guidance on loading level?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 18:53:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3353</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3352</link>
			<description><![CDATA[fitting the hot and the cold resistance versus loading cycle we get Rhot = 15.1123*(cycle^ -0.0610) Rcold = 15.5852*(cycle^ -0.0454) cycle hot cold 10 14.04 13.13 100 12.64 11.41 200 12.25 10.94 300 12.03 10.67 3000 10.84 9.27 30000000 7.13 5.29 I expect other factors come in to play long before the 30 millionth cycle. Also long before the 100th cycle.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 18:47:23 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3352</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3351</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thanks for you input Ed, your explanation makes sense to me. It is a good sign, but it would also means we can keep on loading the wire even when the resistance is not showing decrease. It would be interesting to make 2 hours symmetric cycles of heating cooling to show if that does as I say.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 18:04:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3351</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3350</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Mathieu, the temperature dependence is something that has an activation temperature between room temp and 170 degrees. It is something that decreases the mobility of the electrons in the nickel/copper. It could be the hydrogen that is in the nickel/copper lattice. When cool it is not ionized, it is a neutral impurity that has little impact on the electron mobility. When hot 170 degrees it is ionized and as a charged impurity it causes electron scattering that lowers the net mobility. As more loading takes place the amplitude of the hot/cold difference increases. This is what we see in the data. The initial step down in resistance with loading may be hydrogen in inter grain boundary spaces. The later loading may be into the lattice itself. Ed Pell]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3350</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3349</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I still have to investigate why the resistance increased during the calibrations, but I am pretty sure this is due to direct current under vacuum. I image there were some water/moisture inside the wire from the preparation and the plastic bag. What do you think?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3349</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3348</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Yes, under any measure now though, we have probably exceeded our loading success when compared to previous experiments. And this bodes well.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:50:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3348</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3347</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer: I previously mentioned that R0 was 18.45 Ohm, but that was under conditions comparable to current ones (250 mW at the active wire, pressurized hydrogen atmosphere, no heating, pre-loading conditions). If we were to reduce pressure to 1 atm or applying vacuum, active wire resistance would likely decrease even further, but in turn also probably be in closer testing conditions to those of when the R0 value from the spreadsheet was obtained. When and how should R and R0 be measured, when used to obtain the R/R0 ratio?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3347</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3345</link>
			<description><![CDATA[For those that might have missed it (and I did - doh!) the wire characteristics including R0 (initial resistance value at room temp is on the second tab sheet) http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-2/285-us-eu-cell-calibration-results R0 was 17.31 Ohms Given that the resistance drop after cool down is getting larger, taking the last drop from the current value, we are likely to have exceeded 23% by this calculation, making this already our best loading to date - and only passively!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:14:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3345</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3340</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Actually, no it is still periodically varying ±1.5°C Sorry for that :D]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 14:34:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3340</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3339</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Something very interesting is going on right now. T_mica is rising where P_in is constant.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 14:28:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3339</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3338</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I am not so intrigued by the current/pressur e reading, it is highly correlated by the resistance/temp erature of the wire and the cell. The PSU that supplies the Celani wire is not controlled in power. It is just behaving in a constant voltage mode, I should have put it in constant current mode. My bad. However, increase of the resistance drop as it cycles is something of a great interest. It might be related to hydrogen diffusion inside the constantan lattice. I think about doing such thing with different diameter of wires and define what would be the physical limit.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 13:53:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3338</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3337</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco, Those bumps look like what I'm seeing on the pressure. Very curious .EU1.3A 30 Sec 06/21/2013 14:00:00 06/21/2013 20:00:00 Robert, excellent observation on the resistance going lower on each cycle.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 13:26:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3337</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3336</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Not a bad suggestion on the extrapolation idea. Interesting to note on monitor current. We intend to play safe with this wire to start with and focus on primary goals. Later, regardless of the outcome, we can be more adventurous. Having said that - the wire is performing very well and we do want to try and have a record breaking loading of around 30%, so let's see.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 12:23:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3336</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3332</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer I think that is naturally following the slow drop in resistance when power (heat) is applied. It did decrease quite a bit, though, from 18.45 Ohm (on 2013-06-19 18:53 UTC) to 13.51 Ohm. That's a R/R0 value of 0.732 (measured with 250 mW on the active wire, no external heating. I'm not sure if these are the proper conditions for R/R0 measurements and calculations).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 10:24:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3332</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3330</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Seeing a very interesting phenomenon, the drop in resistance when power is turned off is increasing with every cycle. Will post a bit of data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 22 Jun 2013 10:15:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3330</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3299</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This is calibration with the NiCr wire not excess heat with the NiCu wire.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 21:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3299</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3292</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@#15 Sanjeev All good questions! From the data review of the first Celani replication runs, it's possible that the loading continues until the resistance of the CuNi wire stops its downward slope and starts a steady increase in resistance. It's at that point in the past data that we started to see excess power. Both temp and pressure in the cell also affect the resistance so sometimes it's a bit confusing but over time (sometimes weeks) you tend to see a bowl shape in the resistance graph. Of course I could be completely wrong about all this : O]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:18:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3292</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sanjeev says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3290</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco, Mathieu wrote that the loading was a success and temp is rising, so I guessed it must be running now. So its still loading. I think this time with two cells, there will be more control.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sanjeev</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3290</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sanjeev says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3288</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I guess there is no P_xs column this time ? How will we know when it starts producing excess ?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sanjeev</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 15:39:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3288</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sanjeev says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3287</link>
			<description><![CDATA[About 0.5C rise in T_Mica since power on. Not bad for a start :) The new UI is also neat. Thanks a lot.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sanjeev</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 15:37:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3287</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3285</link>
			<description><![CDATA[T_mica is slightly influenced by T_ambient.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 11:45:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3285</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3284</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Temperatures are rizing. The wire is switching another mode.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:29:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3284</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3283</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The vacuum is not related to the current pressure inside the cell A. The valve maintain the pressure inside this cell whereas the vacuum pump is still on an pulling on cell B. The TC for T_amb is wired on cell B. Your remark is interesting, I don't know yet why this is happening. There must be related to the environment or the electronics, because these variations are above the minimum range of detection of these sensors. The vacuum level might be influenced by a small leak through the valve, I am going to tight it up again. We'll see.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3283</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3282</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Very nice viewer tool now! Congrats to your IT guys !!!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 10:16:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3282</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3280</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell Try the mouse wheel!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:39:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3280</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3279</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Mathieu Valat/Scott These are some awesome enhancements to the viewer! It's looking more like an o'scope every day! :-)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:32:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3279</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3278</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Live data stopped updating at 20:46 UTC]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:20:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3278</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3277</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Scott, the multiple axises look great. Grouping by units is a good idea. The double click zoom in is good. Is there a way to restore to the original size?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3277</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3276</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It looks like after the initial rise in temperature (of about 1-1.5 C from ~169C) following the decrease in active wire resistance , T_Mica temperature (along with other internal temperatures) is now decreasing again. Maybe this one was a short lived chemical effect after all?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:56:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3276</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mathieu Valat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3273</link>
			<description><![CDATA[BTW, data.hugnetlab. com is looking shinier now!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mathieu Valat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:30:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-3273</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
