[Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
I have been conducting a review of a graph of the ECAT internal temperature (T2) versus time. This graph reveals some important facts concerning the operation of the ECAT which can be uncovered with a bit of effort. I am including several of the discoveries that I have uncovered for the benefit of this technically qualified group. I know that I will have interesting feedback regarding my points if history of the vortex is a guide. It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The only other possible explanation for the anomalous reading at this time mark would be if the water flow were high enough to fill the ECAT and start to overflow into the heat exchanger. Of course, the rate of water flow into the ECAT is one of the most contentious parameters that we have been discussing within vortex. Some measurements suggest that overflow is occurring at this time and others do not agree. Mats Lewan measured a flow rate of .91 grams/second at 18:57 by collecting water for a 6 minute period during which he collected 328 grams of output. He collected enough water for a long enough time to obtain a reasonable average. Meanwhile, the leakage water exiting the ECAT case was measured and estimated to be 2 kilograms/hour. This calculates to be .555 grams per second. The addition of the two yields 1.46 grams/second as the assumed flow rate. I calculated the total water delivered to the ECAT using this figure and obtained 1.46 grams/second x 9480 seconds = 13.8 kilograms. This is about one half of the estimated water capacity of the ECAT, which is 30 kilograms. There is support for a larger water input flow rate however. During the September test documented by Mats the ECAT started to overfill after 8400 seconds. The ECAT used for that test (SN?) was reported to have a volume of approximately 30 liters. Mats kept very accurate records of the water inflow and I am very grateful to him. The water input flow rate can be calculated as 3 grams divided by 8400 seconds, or 3.57 grams/second. This can be converted into 12.857 liters/hour which is very close to the specification of the pump (2 liters/hour). Also, during the September test the temperature reading at what we now call T2 was 90.3 C which is below boiling. The saturated pressure associated with this temperature is lower than atmospheric and thus the pump should be capable of delivering its specified flow rate. The argument presented above is so persuasive that I plan to analyze the behavior of the ECAT further using the assumption that overflow is in fact occurring much earlier than I anticipated. There must be a reason for the low flow rate that Mats measured for the October test and I suspect that the data has an effect hidden within. I think that it is safe to assume that one of the two options I have listed is functioning. Either the ECAT is overflowing quite early within the test, or its water level is significantly lower and the temperature probe is not touching the heat sink fins. I have made several additional interesting observations during my review of this particular graph which I will document for the group when convenient. I do not wish to overload the vortex with too large of a post at one time. Dave
Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The environment inside the reactor veseel would have a partial pressure of steam of about 0.85bar at 95°C, this steam will act to very rapidly heat anything within the reactor vessel to exactly the same temperatures (acting as a heat pipe) through the action of condensation, though it would be possible for dry surfaces to be hotter (superheating absorbs a releatively tiny amount of energy per degree of temperature change comapred to vaporisation). I therefore think your hypothesis of overflow is much more likely than that the thermocouple is under-reading. However another possiblity is that there is a significant opening from the reactor. While it is a reasonable surmise that there is a pressure relief valve given the way the reactor was emptied in the video from Sept demo, we still don't know don't know for sure, and it seems rather curious that the temp/pressure seems to get up to 2 bar gauge in the Sept test and 1.35bar in the Oct 6th test. It may instead simply be a small orifice. If steam does flow from the vessel to the heat exchanger (be it an orifice or a slightly leaky or non-ideal relief valve) then condensation would lead to a large flow of heat energy as the condensing steam casues a partial vacuum and is continually replaced.
Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
At the time this measurement was performed, the water had not been boiling and air is occupying the space above it. This would cause a high humidity, but I am not sure that much condensation would occur. Do you still think that the condensation would be adequate to keep the probe reading accurately? -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The environment inside the reactor veseel would have a partial pressure of steam of about 0.85bar at 95°C, this steam will act to very rapidly heat anything within the reactor vessel to exactly the same temperatures (acting as a heat pipe) through the action of condensation, though it would be possible for dry surfaces to be hotter (superheating absorbs a releatively tiny amount of energy per degree of temperature change comapred to vaporisation). I therefore think your hypothesis of overflow is much more likely than that the thermocouple is under-reading. However another possiblity is that there is a significant opening from the reactor. While it is a reasonable surmise that there is a pressure relief valve given the way the reactor was emptied in the video from Sept demo, we still don't know don't know for sure, and it seems rather curious that the temp/pressure seems to get up to 2 bar gauge in the Sept test and 1.35bar in the Oct 6th test. It may instead simply be a small orifice. If steam does flow from the vessel to the heat exchanger (be it an orifice or a slightly leaky or non-ideal relief valve) then condensation would lead to a large flow of heat energy as the condensing steam casues a partial vacuum and is continually replaced.
Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High
At 0.85bar partial pressure of steam there would definitely be enough. Heat pipes in general, and particulalrly those utilising steam have incredible rates of heat transfer. On 26 October 2011 18:12, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: At the time this measurement was performed, the water had not been boiling and air is occupying the space above it. This would cause a high humidity, but I am not sure that much condensation would occur. Do you still think that the condensation would be adequate to keep the probe reading accurately? -Original Message- From: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 26, 2011 12:43 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:ECAT Temperature Probe Not Touching Fins or Flow Rate High It can be determined that the probe measuring T2 is not in thermal contact with the heat sink attached to the core modules. This observation is clearly revealed by the following logic. At Mats Lewan’s October test time of 13:38 we first see output in the secondary loop of the heat exchanger. This is indicated by the rise in Tout (23.7 C to 26.3 C) as compared to the previous values. It is well known that output cannot be obtained at the heat exchanger unless the water within the ECAT is boiling. This requires a temperature of greater than 100 C. Also, we have established that some form of check valve is in series with the output water flow which further increases the required temperature. The pressure would not be sufficient to open the valve ahead of this point in time. The data from Mats’ report shows that the T2 reading at 13:38 is 94.8 C. We predict that this is not accurate and is displaying a value that is too low. My suspicion is that the reading is being influenced by the conduction of a measurable amount of heat energy along the probe to the outside case of the ECAT which has not been heated significantly as of that point in time. Also, we can be assured that the probe is not in contact with the heat sink fins since they are the source of the heat for the water. The temperature of this heat sink must be greater than the temperature of the water in order for heat to flow from it. The environment inside the reactor veseel would have a partial pressure of steam of about 0.85bar at 95°C, this steam will act to very rapidly heat anything within the reactor vessel to exactly the same temperatures (acting as a heat pipe) through the action of condensation, though it would be possible for dry surfaces to be hotter (superheating absorbs a releatively tiny amount of energy per degree of temperature change comapred to vaporisation). I therefore think your hypothesis of overflow is much more likely than that the thermocouple is under-reading. However another possiblity is that there is a significant opening from the reactor. While it is a reasonable surmise that there is a pressure relief valve given the way the reactor was emptied in the video from Sept demo, we still don't know don't know for sure, and it seems rather curious that the temp/pressure seems to get up to 2 bar gauge in the Sept test and 1.35bar in the Oct 6th test. It may instead simply be a small orifice. If steam does flow from the vessel to the heat exchanger (be it an orifice or a slightly leaky or non-ideal relief valve) then condensation would lead to a large flow of heat energy as the condensing steam casues a partial vacuum and is continually replaced.
