EU Cell#2 active wire run (UPDATE #1 + New Video)

Written by Ryan Hunt on 12 December 2012.

We had very good results this afternoon, I tried to nail down the activation temperature using a passive heating after reducing the pressure to 1 bar and increasing the power in the NiCr wire. for a temperature of 184°C we were able to see T mica rising without any change in P_in. It kept oscillating with an amplitude at lower value as the temperature was set lower.

Then reducing power in several time allowed us to see that this behaviour was showing a lower amplitude.

The first run of the EU cell will occur at around 20:30 CET. We will have a range of power metrics for you.

P_Out Low (W) = The most conservative power in watts output from the cell calculated from the highest calibration curve fit
P_Out High (W) = The most optimistic power in watts output from the cell calculated from the lowest calibration curve fit

P_Xs Low (W) = The most conservative EXCESS power calculated by the formulae

P_Xs Low = P_Out Low - (Power (Blue) + Power (Red))

Today at 12:12:12 PST on the 12/12/12 (during the 21st CET hour) we will power the active wire and see if there is any excess heat generated from the cell. We should start at P_in = 48W to get the best replication of Celani’s work.

We have a “deliberate mistake” in the data viewer, if you are sober enough at this time in the day, we challenge you to spot it.

Wish us luck!

UPDATE #1 Flicking the switch

So, as of 2:55 Indian time I am seeing around 6W Pxs on our most conservative baseline.

Here was the moment of switchover of the Power.

Bob

< Prev Next >

Add comment

Comments

12345

+1 #100 artefact 2012-12-14 14:10

have a nice lunchtime!

+2 #99 Robert Greenyer 2012-12-14 13:57

@all

Lunch with CELANI - OPEN GOOGLE HANGOUT NOW!

Search for bob greenyer

0 #98 Ron B 2012-12-14 13:03

How does the accuracy of the thermocouple affect the readings we are viewing?

This is the accuracy for the thermocouples:
Temp Type E J K N R S T

200 1.7 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.8

digital.ni.com/.../...

0 #97 Gerrit 2012-12-14 12:14

Quoting Ecco:

The higher the T_Ambient, the less the P_xs, though.

If the P_Xs calculation is based on the difference between a measured temperature and T_Ambient, then an increasing T_Ambient will decrease the offset and thus decrease P_Xs.

0 #96 Philip Quarles 2012-12-14 11:45

I googled "Seebeck Calorimeter" and found this:

"Use Of A Very Sensitive Seebeck Calorimeter To Study The Pons-Fleischman n And Letts Effects" at lenr-canr.org/.../...

0 #95 Ecco 2012-12-14 11:37

The higher the T_Ambient, the less the P_xs, though.

0 #94 Gerrit 2012-12-14 11:32

It seems the increase in power from 48W to 55W influenced T_Ambient.

0 #93 Ecco 2012-12-14 10:58

Following the latest input power increase to 55W, active wire impedance started acting weirdly, decreasing in sudden steps. I think that after power will be brought back to 48W, wire impedance will turn out to be lower than before the power rise.

It will also be interesting to see if after decreasing input power back to 48W, excess power will be the same or will have increased. I'm starting to think that it's not got a definite relationship with wire impedance.

-1 #92 Gerrit 2012-12-14 10:48

I looked at temp values from 8 december 01:00 to 12:00. There was no power switched on during that time.

All the temperature readings are in phase with T_Ambient.

Offset of T_Well, T_Mica, T_GlassIn and T_GlassOut could be due to pressure decrease during that time.

Larger offset of T-Board (approx +5°C) should be explained.

i.imgur.com/gXOcb.png

0 #91 Ecco 2012-12-14 09:50

Offtopic, but Danielle Passerini (22passi) is live blogging today's "Coherence 2012" conference in Rome attended by Masteromatteo (STMicroelectro nics), Celani and Bob Greenyer (and others in the LENR scene, of course). Google Translation needed:

22passi.blogspot.com/.../...

0 #90 Eric Walker 2012-12-14 09:34

Re next steps -- although I gather that a flow calorimeter will be very helpful here, it seems like it would be a big mess to immerse the cell in a fluid bath of sufficient size. Another possibility is a Seebeck calorimeter: bit.ly/12p1sMJ.

0 #89 123star 2012-12-14 09:12

Is it possible to have an official and updated chart like the one Ecco posted (thanks Ecco!)?
This is the chart that he posted:

0 #88 Eric Walker 2012-12-14 08:59

Three thoughts to add to what has been said:

1. A promising case has been made that the HVAC system is kicking in and is adding a near-hourly period to P_Xs Low.

2. When you subtract out the period, I suspect you'll get a fairly smooth curve, with several watts above Power (Blue). As Jed Rothwell has pointed out elsewhere (bit.ly/SVw04s), I think the kind of signal we're probably looking for if LENR is underway is going to be very jumpy -- first up, then way down, then way up, etc. This leads me to think we have a calibration problem in this instance. In any event, the SB argument that Sanjeev has made suggests that the error bars are quite large here; if we do things right, I think we can get them down to the milliwatts.

3. If we don't have a calibration problem, the current result would be pretty exciting. It would appear that we have accomplished the goal of replicating Celani, and can then address how to make the error bars smaller.

+5 #87 Rats 2012-12-14 02:44

Cool, 3000 views on this post so far. Gangam style ain't got nothing on the MFMP! ;-)

;-)

0 #86 Ecco 2012-12-13 22:20

@Sanjeev: ah, now I see. That was with the active wire under helium, before hydrogen loading.

It's the calibration run I highlighted with a red arrow in this chart:

i.imgur.com/6yf8z.png

However, that run was running at much lower temperatures than previous ones made with the oxidized inactive constantan wire. The current "conservative" P_xs calculation is instead based on the highest one on this chart among those runs.

Unfortunately, this makes it unclear whether excess power is being produced right now.

0 #85 Sanjeev 2012-12-13 22:02

@ecco,

If you see the log entry 2012-12-10-16:0 0CET, I used that time period. Plot is for P=1.3 bar. Mathieu mentions new tube and active wire. This is the closest calibration I could find, conditions totally match with present.

Edit: Cell#2-360L-201 21210-He-P1.xls x

0 #84 Ecco 2012-12-13 21:46

@Sanjeev: very interesting. Probably, my concerns regarding SB discrepancies were excessive. I was aware that some heat (for example from the glass tube ends) was unaccounted for, but I forgot about other energy transfers. I will think twice before posting about something I'm not expert in, next time.

If you chose the calibration called Calib-He-P1 (essentially what is considered "conservative") , that was with the inactive, untreated oxidized constantan wire if I remember correctly.

The calibrations called 360L-He-Px were with the active (Celani) wire.

0 #83 Sanjeev 2012-12-13 21:29

Quoting Ecco:

- The SB law shows that the radiated power is significantly less than the input power, which means that if there's excess heat, it's very small;

- Not only that, but there is a large discrepancy between radiated power calculation and output power derived by curve fitting against previous calibrations.

We have discussed this before. The SB power will be less because it ignores energy transfer by convection and conduction, which the calibration curve does take into account.

Anyway, I found something interesting while messing with calibration data. This is the SB(radiated) power out during calibration with He, pressure 1.3 bar (with active wire?). The last step is at 46 W, note that the Pout is only 22 W. The one I posted for the run on 12/12 showed 31 W, a 9 W excess radiated power....

i49.tinypic.com/2yl702x.jpg

0 #82 Ecco 2012-12-13 21:29

I'm wondering: is the T_GlassIn thermocouple too just barely touching the glass surface? I'm asking because it's already pretty close to T_GlassOut temperatures. As internal temperatures should be hotter, this means that T_GlassOut temperature readings shouldn't improve too much, assuming that the thermocouple isn't optimally placed.

0 #81 Ecco 2012-12-13 20:50

After all these useful posts I think that a list of things which can be quickly, simply and cheaply improved to make the experimental set-up more reliable could be made.

12345

Refresh comments list
RSS feed for comments to this post

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