I think heat is important and is supplemented with an over riding magnetic
field at higher temperatures. In other words there are 2 parameters that
affect the reaction rate--heat with its slow reaction time and magnetic field
which acts with a smaller time constant. The heat is supplied in the form of
phonons and not infrared radiation and therefore depends upon heat conduction
with whatever rate the composite material of Rossi's reactor has considering
both the metal shell and the internal composite material which Rossi says is Ni
and H. I think the heat is required to get the spectrum of lattice vibrations
into a range where resonance coupling with the Ni-H reaction can be achieved.
The size of the Ni particles would be important in this regard.
I consider the magnetic field is what is the primary controller of the energy
producing reaction between the Ni and H, however.
The recent report by Mizuno may have been nano Ni particles dispersed within a
ZrO2 matrix which would have some other thermal properties than Rossi's
reactor. Mizuno's reaction seemed to produce hydrogen from D and in this
regard may be a different reaction than Rossi's effect.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Higgins
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 8:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thermal inertia
I think it is much more likely that Rossi's reaction is positive feedback
when operating, is chaotic in nature (discontinuous), and requires a
temperature threshold for the reaction to work.
First, positive feedback - when the temperature is higher the reaction rate
is higher, causing the temperature to go higher. The gain is infinite.
Second, chaotic: the reaction may go to completion in an NAE and then stop
altogether. This causes reduced heat and the temperature drops. At an
uncertain random time another NAE or set of NAE may begin operation producing
heat.
Third, temperature threshold: Below a certain temperature threshold, the
reaction rate falls rapidly to none. Due to the chaotic nature of the rate,
the temperature can briefly fall below this threshold and if energy is not
input from the control, then the reaction stops altogether.
Rossi maintains his reactor at the threshold of thermal runaway. At this
threshold, the reaction is stopping at random, gets a heat input from his
control to cross the temperature threshold, and the reaction starts at other
NAE. If it ever gets too hot (too little heat was taken out), the reaction
runs away and melts down.
I think if Rossi had a large thermal mass kept slightly above the threshold,
he would be able to control the system solely by throttling the heat being
withdrawn from the large thermal mass. Doing this he would be able to reach
large COPs since the throttling control of the heat exchanger requires much
less power than directly heating his eCat (which for the HotCat has a fairly
constant thermal heat withdrawal rate near the operating temperature). In
effect, the large heat sink would average over the chaotic drops and rises in
temperature.
Bob
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
This may be of interest to Dave - in modeling Rossi's thermodynamics
https://www.thermalfluidscentral.org/journals/index.php/Heat_Mass_Transfer/a
rticle/view/69/145
There is a conceptual roadblock with understanding the E-Cat related to the
subject of thermal gain - contrasted with the need for continuing thermal
input.
In simple terms, the argument is this: if there is real thermal gain in the
reaction (P-out > P-in) then why is continuing input of energy required? Why
not simple recycle some of the gain, especially if the gain is strong such
as if it was at COP=6 ?
There are several partial answers to this question. One of them involves
keeping positive feedback to a far lower level than optimum (for net gain)
to avoid the possibility of runaway. Another is based on models of thermal
inertial. Another is based on the fact that the real COP of Ni-H in general
may be limited to a lower number than most of us hope is possible.
A third answer, or really a clarification of thermal inertial would be seen
in Fig 2 on page 4 of the above cited article, where two models are seen
side by side. If we also add a requirement for a threshold thermal plateau
for the Rossi reaction to happen, which includes a narrow plateau (more like
a ridge) where negative feedback turns to positive, then we can see that the
second model makes it important to maintain an outside input, since there is
no inherent smoothness in the curve, and once a peak has been reached the
downslope can be abrupt .
Which is another way of saying that thermal inertia is not a smooth curve at
an important scale, and thus natural conductivity and heat transfer
characteristics may not be adequate to maintain a positive feedback plateau,
at least not without an outside source of heat.
This may not be a clear verbalization of the thermodynamics, and perhaps
someone can word it more clearly - but it explains the need for the
"goldilocks" or 3-bear mode of reaction control for E-Cat. (not too hot and
not too cold)
