The latest design by Dr. Parkhomov has several excellent features worth commenting upon. The external heating cylinder should allow him to avoid the constant rebuilding required as the devices burn out regularly. Of course this assumes that the heater windings themselves do not fail due to overheating which should be possible to achieve with good materials engineering.
The inner core module can now be replaced as they fail during testing. This should be far easier than what was possible in the earlier design when the entire device was destroyed. He can concentrate upon the amount and type of fuel loaded into the central unit until the design reaches some form of stable operation that can be statically measured. It should now be trivial to test a dummy core for calibration purposes as well. If the latest outer cylinder diameter and surface area are larger than for the previous design, the temperature of that surface must decrease so that a balance is restored. Since radiation is the major path for heat to escape the total reduction in outer temperature will not be substantial since heat leaving is mainly proportional to the forth power of surface temperature. The inner core is bathed within the center of the outer heater and should remain near the temperature of the inner wall of the heating cylinder when absent any internal power generation. The effects of heat power generation within the inner core will likely be more pronounced with the latest design. The presence of an air gap between the cylinders should effectively increase the positive feedback due to core heat power generation. This should occur because the thermal power generated within the core must travel through a greater amount of thermal resistance before reaching the radiating surface of the large cylinder. It is important for us to witness a working replication that can be measured before it self destructs in order to build up our confidence. So far it is impossible to determine what failure lead to the termination of the testing. The materials are being pushed much too hard with the extreme temperatures encountered and that needs to be modified if we are to do real science upon these devices. The obvious solution to this problem, as I have mentioned before, is to reduce the core loading material until a stable operation is achieved. No load must be stable by definition and too much will lead to thermal run away, so why not start nearer to the no load state? Begin with 1/2 the amount of material that the core cylinder can accept and complete a temperature run. If the device does not self destruct then it will have a COP of greater than unity. Furthermore, the characteristic curve plotting input power versus temperature will indicate that the device is tending toward a negative resistance region of operation depending upon the positive feedback gain present. If 1/2 the core loading is too little or too large then it can be adjusted until operation is obtained that can be scientifically observed. My preference is to use as much core loading as possible before thermal run away is initiated. This will generate a modest COP of between 2 and 4 with static drive which can be measured reasonably accurately. Once stable operation is achieved it will be possible to measure the activity of the fuel under this condition. Since the amount of excess power can be measured and the mass of the fuel is known, it should be possible to calculate the number of watts per kilogram that is generated at different temperatures. Eventually, it will become necessary to adjust the hydrogen pressure as well as the other important parameters to understand exactly how they affect the fuel activity. There will one day exist a complicated set of equations that can be applied in order to engineer a product. Dave
