Bob,

Yes, I would like to see those ripples go away.  If nothing else, the pulses 
would then be very clean and easy to measure accurately.   The very large 
thermal time constant of the Dewar-cell test system should do a pretty good job 
of eliminating them, but they are clearly seen in the collected data.  They are 
also present in the ambient temperature reading at a similar value.  
Indications are that some noise is spiking the test equipment.

Dave

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Sat, Jan 31, 2015 6:17 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Alternate Calculation and Calibration Method for Mizuno Report



Dave--
 
When I first saw the ripples in the models predictions, I thought that it would 
have to be explained--that the instrumentation signal may have some unknown 
input noise.  This needs to be resolved as you suggest.
 
Bob Cook
  
----- Original Message ----- 
  
From:   David   Roberson 
  
To: [email protected] 
  
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 5:50   PM
  
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Alternate Calculation   and Calibration Method for Mizuno 
Report
  


I agree that   the pump power is not going to screw up the calculations as long 
as it is   constant.   It looks like just any other constant signal that will 
be   subtracted off by your technique.

The same protection is given to the   errors in ambient measurements such as an 
offset.  Once you hold the true   ambient constant you will have to deal with 
the leakage of the signals that   occur before you make the last measurement.  
Take a look at my   calculation of how much is going to escape through the 
thermal   resistance.  I can clearly see the tilt downwards with my   model.

We could compensate for the signal droop if you wish.  We   know the time 
constant and can effectively boost signals that have been   drained as a result 
of its operation.  That will likely double the number   of joules you measure 
from the pulse train.

First, lets get the ambient   variation under control and then we can clean up 
the loose ends.

It   looks like the thermometer is not the source of the ripples.  Maybe I am   
seeing the HVAC cycles on and off.  The period is in the ballpark of 1000   
seconds.  The odd thing about it is that it is appearing upon the coolant   
measurement itself as well as the ambient.   The large coolant   thermal 
capacitance should filter them from that waveform.  We might be   seeing an 
issue with noise getting into the electronics instead of the   calorimeter.

Dave
  


  


  


  
-----Original   Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>
To:   vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, Jan 30, 2015 7:52   pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Alternate Calculation and Calibration Method for   Mizuno 
Report

  
  
  
  
David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:
  

  
Using that     delta we would have 2 watts of excess heat leaking into the     
system.
  


  
From the pump? That is plausible. ~1.5 W from the mechanical work of the   
impeller, and ~0.5 W from motor heat conduction.
  


  
However, I hope you now agree that this will not affect the adiabatic   
calorimetry, given that the temperature was so stable for 28 hours. I was   
astounded to see it was so stable! Any heat pulse or anomalous heat will be on  
 top of this baseline.
  


  

 
  
Perhaps the     thermometer output varies in accurate steps of .01 degree     
increments?
  


  
I doubt that. It is coming from a 1980s vintage HP A/D interface. I do   not 
think that was limited to 2-digit accuracy.
  


  
Watch out for your spreadsheet settings. I think I uploaded it set to   round 
to the nearest 0.01. Change the setting and you will see more digits   appear. 
I do not know how many are significant.
  


  
It does not take much to throw off the air temperature measurements. Move   a 
fan or a space heater a little and bang, you have a half-degree change. It   is 
fortunate the reactor is under such heavy insulation.
  


  
- Jed
  






Reply via email to