I agree with Brian that there can be a lot of uncertainties associated with air
cooling. 3 or 4 years ago Jed and Muzino were fooled by daytime to night room
temperature variations and how they affected conclusions from air flow
calorimetry. Dave Robertson and I commented on Vortex-l about this issue then.
Bob Cook
From: Brian Ahern
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 5:04:04 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Re: Misuno technology a simple test
Ask Mizuno to run the system making excess thermal energy and then simply
change the inlet and outlet air flows. The outlet is currently above the inlet
and that can be a problem. This may show a dramatic drop in thermal output due
to buoyancy driven convection.
This easy and can get quick evidence that the calorimetry is not fooling
everyone.
From: Alberto De Souza
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 12:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mizuno presentation at ICCF-21
Mizuno's results show hundreds of extra watts coming out of the reactor. One
thermocouple (or several) would certainly show a significant teperature
difference (tens of degrees) between a dummy and a loaded reactor. We are
already having long discussions about calorimetry rights and wrongs... The
setup I have suggested would confirm anomalous heat without any doubt, if the
kind of COP Misuno has achieved is replicated.
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 9:05 PM Jed Rothwell
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Alberto De Souza
mailto:alberto.investi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I would like to suggest a setup for the replication of Misuno’s results. In
this setup we would have two reactors operating side-by-side at the same time:
one active and one dummy . . . Finally, thermocouples would monitor the
temperature in the external metal surface of both reactors. A significant
temperature difference between the reactors would demonstrate that there is
anomalous heat.
Someone else suggested that. Here is what I wrote in response:
I do not think this would be a good idea. Mizuno has found large differences in
the temperature from one part of the reactor wall to another. He uses air flow
calorimetry because it is not affected such temperature variations. You do have
to measure the reactor wall temperature, because that tells you a great deal
about the reaction, but I do not think it would work well for calorimetry. If
you want to use the wall temperature, perhaps an IR camera that measures half
the reactor vessel would work. I have no experience doing that.
Here's the problem. The Ni mesh reactant is right up against the inside wall.
If the experiment works, the mesh gets hot, and the portion of the wall just
outside the mesh gets hot. Significantly hotter than the rest of the outside
wall, or the ends of reactor. That would be difficult to model, I think. It
complicates matters.
If you observed that the portion of the wall outside the mesh is much hotter
than the rest of the cell, that would be good evidence the mesh is producing
heat. An IR camera might reveal that.