New Experiment Generates Apparent Excess Heat
|April 16, 2015||Posted by Jack Cole under Alexander Parkhomov, Andrea Rossi, E-Cat, Hobbyist LENR|
The reader is invited to provide criticism of the following report to help determine any potential errors. I have been waiting on presenting these results in full since the experiment was performed on 3/24/15 and 3/25/15, but have made mention of the results in comments. I am not completely certain of the results, but the results seem strong in light of findings by other experimenters. Follow-up experiments will be performed using mass calorimetry.
Alexander Parkhomov in his most recent replication of Andrea Rossi’s Hot Cat, reported a maximum COP of 3.2. This present experiment departs from my previous experiments in that the fuel is kept consistent with Parkhomov’s method (nickel powder and lithium aluminum hydride only). A new control system was used in the present experiment utilizing PWM (pulse width modulation), two solid-state relays, and a PID controller.
An alumina tube measuring 1/4″ ID and 3/8″ OD by 9″ long was utilized for the reactor tube (closed one end). The open end was sealed with a brass compression fitting. Five inches of the internal tube space was taken up with an alumina rod and additional space was taken up by a CaO/Alumina powder mix. Power input levels were measured by a home energy monitor.
Figure A. Reactor Tube Covered with Insulation
The compression fitting did not form a completely hermetic seal as hydrogen was detected with a combustible gas detector. Parkhomov demonstrated that very high pressures are unnecessary, and that the pressure drops below atmospheric pressure after 1000C. Thus, a perfectly hermetic seal may not be necessary.
In the initial phase of the experiment, only the PWM and single SSR were used. Unfortunately, this did not provide enough fine control to get calibration points. Additionally, it was discovered that the PC-based thermocouple transducer only recorded temperatures up to 1022C. As such, the thermocouple was connected to a PID controller, which has a maximum temperature reading of 1275C. Based on previous calibrations using heat flux measurements, this initial phase produced COPs in the range of 1.4 to 1.5 over a period of approximately 3 hours. Temperatures exceeded 1275C, which was the limit of the PID controller’s measurement capabilities.
At this point, the power was turned off. An additional SSR was added in concert with a PID controller (which was previously being used only for temperature measurements). In this time period, the cell temperature dropped to 230C. The experiment was resumed in Phase II with 3 calibration points below 1100C (600C, 800C, 1000C). The PID controller was set to those levels and the energy monitor was reset once a stable temperature line was obtained at the target temperature. The total energy used while maintaining a temperature level was used to calculate the average power input at each temperature level.
At temperatures exceeding 1100C, COP values ranged from 1.4 to 1.8 based on the calibration curve from the lower temperatures of the reaction tube. Based on previous calibrations of heat flux measurements, COPs ranged from 1.3 to 1.8 (1.05 to 1.5 based on a re-calibration run). The tube was observed visually in order to make a subjective comparison between the expected color temperature for 1200C and the incandescent tube color. The color of incandescence was consistent with temperatures in the range of 1200C. This experiment used two separate ways of measuring COP, which yielded reasonably consistent results. Phase II lasted approximately 4 hours, bringing the total time for apparent excess heating to 7 hours. The experiment ended with a failure of the resistance heating wire.
Chart A. COP Observations.
Chart B. Input Power by Temperature
Chart C. Input Power by Temperature (Axes Reversed)
The heat flux measurements were taken from a previous experiment utilizing a triac dimmer. Because of uncertainty about the effects of this circuitry on the power measurements, another calibration trial was run with the same control system used above. An empty alumina tube was utilized with a similar resistance coil used in Experiment 1. Four calibration temperatures were utilized (600, 800, 1000, and 1150C).
Chart D. Heat Flux Re-Calibration
Consistent with the findings of Alexander Parkhomov, this experiment demonstrated apparent excess heating in temperature regions above 1100C utlizing two separate sets of measurements (heat flux and calibration curve for the tube temperature below 1100C). The COP values ranged from 1.3 to 1.8 based on the reaction tube surface temperature and 1.05 to 1.5 based on the re-calibration of heat flux. I invite the reader to criticize this work so that we may determine if these results are related to LENR or related to some unrecognized error.
Additional charts and information will be added here as requested.
Chart E. Heat Flux by Reaction Tube Temperature
Chart F. Inclusion of 0,0 points