home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pmafire!news.dell.com!swrinde!mips!pacbell.com!tandem!zorch!fusion
- From: 72240.1256@compuserve.com (Jed Rothwell)
- Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
- Subject: Miscellaneous responses
- Message-ID: <920722180752_72240.1256_EHL5-1@CompuServe.COM>
- Date: 22 Jul 92 22:07:12 GMT
- Sender: scott@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Scott Hazen Mueller)
- Reply-To: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com>
- Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
- Lines: 139
-
- To: >INTERNET:fusion@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG
-
- James White points out that some energy can be stored in heavy water.
- Hmm, well, okay. This is a good reason to make a small cell, with a
- limited amount of heavy water in it. If the water can hold some energy,
- then perhaps it is best to compare the CF cell to a wet cell battery. The
- question then becomes: has this cell continuously generated 100, or 1000
- times more heat energy than a battery of the same weight could generate
- in the form of electricity? If the answer is yes, then we do not need to
- worry whether part of that energy came from short term chemical storage.
- The output has to be *continuous*, however.
-
- "If the calorimeter is calibrated by adding a known amount of heat to a
- working cell, the increase in temperature could increase the rate of D2O2
- formation. This would absorb energy and thus make it appear that a given
- amount of heat causes a smaller temperature rise than is actually the
- case. Thus, a balanced cell would appear to be giving excess heat."
-
- Maybe, but I don't think so. It seems to me it would have a puzzling,
- opposite effect. If you have a resister, you always calibrate before the
- experiment, before electrolysis, when there is no free oxygen. So, the
- pre-run calibration would show, say 2 watts per deg C. Then, during the
- run, you would do a recalibration on the fly, by adding heat to a working
- cell with the resister. This is an excellent idea, by the way, but it is
- not particularly accurate, because the electrolysis background is noisy.
- This time, however, you would add 2 watts and the temperature would only
- go up, say, 0.98 C. That would not look like excess heat. It would
- confuse the issue, but not in such a way as to look like excess heat.
- After a while, there would be a surge of heat, which you might recognize
- as being related to the recalibration, especially if you did it twice a
- week for four months. I personally would write it off as part of the
- background noise problem. It sounds terrible, but I am not interested in
- fractions of watts. I am looking for a 10 or 20 watt excess which lasts
- for weeks, which is far, far out the range of effects from things like
- D2O2. I am hoping, someday, to see the kind of reaction that P&F,
- McKubre, Takahashi or Mizuno saw, which totally swamps any possible
- chemical effect.
-
-
- Not to beat a dead horse on my end either, but Tom Droege remarks:
-
- "That is exactly why I used the initial slope. On the (gross) assumption
- that it is a first order system, the initial slope (and final value) tell
- me everything."
-
- This assumption is incorrect. Your method of deriving the TCal from the
- slope does not work, it does not come close. Mark Hugo left town
- yesterday, but he would be happy to supply the correct equation if
- anybody is interested. It is based upon Newton's law of cooling, with a
- factor thrown in for the added heat from electrolysis and the unknown
- heat from CF. It is very complicated; as I said, all of the
- electrochemists I have talked to strongly recommend you work with a
- system which has come into equilibrium. They say you should stay away
- from transitions, and base your computations on a pre-calibrated points,
- after an hour or more of "settling time."
-
- Not to beat another dead horse, but:
-
- "My only point, I repeat, is that the Takahashi cell is not a very good
- calorimeter. One just can't say anything about what is going on. I know
- there are calibrations at various points. I just don't know how to be
- sure that they mean anything."
-
- My only point is that I have built a Takahashi cell and operated it for
- four months, and I have data which proves that it is a very good
- calorimeter. I *can* say what is going on, with assurance. My cell
- measures heat reliably, week after week; it shows a nice, fat, zero
- excess -- except when we dump water on the computer, or roach the flow
- meter, cut a wire accidentally, or monkey with the cooling water
- temperature. It has definite, known limitations, for example, with my
- particular device, the "box temperature" does not measure amounts less
- than 2 watts very well. However, we have compared the box temperature,
- which is what Takahashi uses, against the best instrument available,
- which was supplied to us by a superb electrical engineer by the name of
- Tom Droege, and we have found that the box calibration agrees with flow
- calibration as measured by the Droege Device *almost* *exactly*. It is
- uncanny. As I said, they separate only at very low power levels, and this
- remains true three weeks into the current run.
-
- You had various doubts about the performance of the cell, primarily
- because you believed the cell mixes the water at different rates during
- high and low phases, (if I understand your argument correctly.) My data
- shows conclusively that this is not the case. If you have any other
- doubts about the design, let me know, and I will check the data to
- resolve your questions. You might also consult with Takahashi, or with
- Mike McKubre, who just came back from visiting Takahashi.
-
- That is my last word on the matter, unless someone would like to see an
- actual sample of data, or has any additional questions.
-
-
- Todd Green asks:
-
- "I'm not sure I understand under what conditions Takahashi measures the
- excess heat. Is the 20 minute current sawtooth just used to charge the
- electrode, or is he doing the XS heat measurements during these ramps? I
- would have thought it very hard to do such a measurement because the
- calorimeter never reaches the steady state - i.e. temp always lagging
- behind the power somewhat."
-
- He measures excess during the 6 hour "high-low" runs. With the last
- experiment this was 100 watts in for 6 hours, followed by 1 watt in for 6
- hours. He got some boiling during the high phase, so for this run, he
- lowered this to 50 watts for 6 hours, followed by 1 watt for 6 hours.
- Takahashi says it is too complicated to measure excess heat during the
- sawtooth run, and in any case, he only runs the sawtooth for a week, and
- the cell does not build up significant excess until a few weeks after
- that.
-
- You are quite right, "it very hard to do such a measurement because the
- calorimeter never reaches the steady state..." The electrochemists I have
- talked to have suggested I avoid such computations; it is much better to
- wait until the cell reaches equilibrium (or gets close to equilibrium;
- there are always slight fluctuations.) This is the suggestion I passed on
- to Tom Droege, above.
-
- However, I have had some success getting a zero by simply adding up all
- of the "instantaneous" power in and power out measurements for a day,
- with the usual fudge factors for heat leak and electrolysis. Since I have
- not seen excess heat, I don't know whether this really works. I think I
- should try adding some heat from our auxiliary resistance heater during a
- sawtooth run. There are so many things I would like to try! It would be
- nice if the DoE would try one or two of these things... These experiments
- are conceptually simple; they are far easier than the computers and
- telephones I tangled with for 14 years; and easier than the biology I
- dabbled in 20 years ago in Japan; but alas, the experiments are time
- consuming and expensive. It is just not possible to do a decent job in
- your spare time.
-
- Metallurgists I have talked to say that the sawtooth "charges up" the
- cell by pushing the deuterons in, and then relaxing, and letting them out
- again. Ikegami and others who have been measuring loading have recently
- confirmed this. The saw tooth method has been know for quite a long time,
- long before CF came on the scene. Mark Hugo cited a study of hydrogen
- embrittlment of steel (I cannot find the title in my notes, alas), in
- which it was found that a 20 minute period was several orders of
- magnitude more effective than day long periods, or very short periods.
-
- - Jed
-