Eric, The feedback is going to adjust the input heater power by the amount required to keep the temperature of the thermocouple sensor constant. A properly adjusted PID controller will ensure that the average temperature is exactly equal to the set point value.
If the design of the device is such that heat generated within the core flows through a thermal resistance before reaching the heater then power originating within the core effects the thermocouple more than the exact same heater power does. That implies that an increase of X watts due to core power generation can only be balanced by a decrease that is larger than X for heater power. The net total power escaping the system will then be less than it was before the core generated the excess heat. With this in mind, a monitor of the outside surface of the large cylinder should show a continuing reduction in temperature as more and more power is generated within the core. It is possible to build a device that does not follow this rule if a person places the temperature sensing thermocouple in a location where the effect of heater power is greater than the effect of core power on that device, but it seems likely that since the core is typically located within the center of the structure that this does not occur. I consider it to be a good plan to ensure that the outside surface monitor shows a temperature drop as core power increases and also a temperature rise if it falls. This of course assumes reasonable location for the sense thermocouple, a well behaved PID controller, and closed loop operation at a fixed temperature level. If Parkhomov had used a monitor for outside temperature measurement of his device or had used his calorimeter as during his previous testing then my supposition could have been proven. It is unfortunate that neither was done. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Eric Walker <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Apr 4, 2015 1:58 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Temperature Confusion Hi Dave, On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 9:16 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: So, now I would like to propose that if MFMP continues to use a closed loop PID controller that accurately keeps the temperature of the outer surface of the core module constant that we can prove that core power is being generated by monitoring the outside surface of the larger cylinder. If that temperature drops, then it is safe to assume that core power is being generated. I didn't follow this last conclusion. Eric
