Let the Data Flood Commence! (Updated)
I hope you are all ready for this, in the next couple of weeks we are all going to have an immense amount of data to work through and we are going to need your help looking for anomalies, patterns, features and most importantly, science.
We know you have been asking for a new wire to be tested since it became apparent that the first one might possibly have been fried. And that will happen next week in the EU cell. We need this to be followed closely.
Whilst that will be as close as we have come yet to a direct replication of Celani's original work - we have heard your calls for more, and you are going to get more, much more. We are going to get to the bottom of this. See what you can spot in this little teaser video.
There are going to be a number of different iterations of Celani's wires, with differing numbers of layers set into metal, borosilicate, quartz single and double ended cells and some insulated, some with a calorimeter or two.
We need everyone to come join the party, invite your friends. Be open minded, help us follow the evidence, let's do science.
UPDATE
There has been some good discussion on the Air Flow Calorimeter but we feel people have been running a little blind up till now, so in the below video, you can see Paul Hunt, the man that has bankrolled much of the hardware you have been watching to date discussing the design. Please discuss any improvements you think can be made and any links to component suppliers.
Comments
In order to rapidly meet your call and others to know what is being run in the cells. I suggested and interim solution to Ryan last night which he has implemented. It is linked at the top of the page next to the LIVE data.
From tomorrow, everyone should be able to see what is going on in various reactors at these links.
Keep those ideas coming!
thanx for your return, also a link with descriptions would be great !
Keep up your great work and tnx for publishing your data.
BR Dieter
Found the log link in the top row
Perfect !!!
Yeah, it was dropping for the while I was watching, but did jump on the next pressure release. I have a limited view of the data unfortunately. This'll be very interesting, and we should be able to directly compare this to the previous "experimental" runs.
T_Glassout seems increasing (while pressure is decreasing) so far to me. Are you sure you are looking at the right cell (#1)?.We are at 4 bar now. Of course, we can only really compare the data points corresponding to (48W, 3.5bar) and (48W, 0.5 bar).
Let's see if T_Glassout will decrease between 3.5 and 0.5 bar.
I suggest taking more data points around these two pressures.
Actually, nevermind. The calibration was a spread of input powers at the same pressure. This is the same input power over a spread of pressures. This will be effectively a new calibration curve.
The T_GlassOut is apparently dropping with pressure so far though.
I would expect the P_xs then to run near 0 all the way through, since it's based on helium as its calibration point? This'll be fun to watch, see if we reconfirm our earlier findings.
Once again I second what Observer has said. As per your own analysis it is highly likely there were measurement errors made by Celani.
It is paramount this issue is resolved before you continue with your experimentation .
This is a top priority but awaiting the open sourcing as resources are constrained. Maybe a temporary measure would be to have a Google spreadsheet (possibly linked) with start/stop times and a basic descriptions.
thank you for publishing a future view of your new reactor types and measuring gear.
It`s nice to see this developing !
Though there is one question I have after watching your video teaser.
Why do you want to go with an air flow calorimeter and how do you want to measure the volume of air flow inside the calorimeter and how good is the accuracy of this volume measurement?
My personal opinion is, that the exact volumetric measurement of a gas flow is a very complex thing, as there are too many different variables which must be observed and which will all add to a possible measurement error !
(A thing we don`t want
The volumetric measurement of the flow of a liquid is very much simpler, so flow calorimeter are mainly built with
a liquid coolant medium (oil or water, depending on the temperature range of the reaction).
Just my 2 cent`s....
Can be because of T_Ambient oscillating almost in a perfect sine wave !
If you have noticed the temperature is very high now, and may be the error bars are bigger here causing the P_Xs to vary too much for small variations in conditions.
On the EU side, the resistance is showing very strange behavior at high temperature (>250`C at present). I guess it still has the inactive wire ? Which is why I'm puzzled.
@Robert
That's great.
That is the approach - move ahead and try and solve the problems.
Why can't we do both - move ahead and go on solving the problems ?
If there is no excess energy, it will become obvious soon. The last experiment had too many uncertainties to conclude anything about this cell or Celani's cell.
I noticed that the pressure is set to around 1 bar for this experiment and I was able to get a good match for the time domain response with the measured time constant of 203 seconds.
This latest time constant is shorter than most earlier ones by a good margin. I wonder if the variability of the temperature along with the shortened time constant is associated with excess power?
Do you know of any reason why the temperature is varying to this degree? It is wandering by a relatively large amount over the entire heating up period including the initial rise time.
The EU cell and possibly at least one more US cell will be looking at exploring these pressure issues more completely. In fact, if you read Mathieu's blog entries you will see he is doing specific calibration runs to help establish the veracity of the US cells findings.
RSS feed for comments to this post